1 

j^FOR€SGN  .eRses. 

BtHG  G0SP€L0F  ST.  JOHN 
Uth^   ^YNOPTiC   GOSPeLS 


^ITZ  '   BHRTH 


l^quf  atli^b  bg  l|im  to 
tlj0  SItbrarg  nf 

Prtttrrtnn  StjMkgtral  S^^mtttarQ 

1552^15 


Foreign   Religious  Series 


Edited  by 
R.  J.   COOKE,  D.   D. 


First  Series.    i6mo,  cloth.     Each  40  cents,  net. 


THE  VIRGIN  BIRTH 

By  Professor  Richard  H.  Griitzmacher,  of  the 
University  of  Rostock 


THE  RESURRECTION  OF  JESUS 

By  Professor  Eduard   Riggenbach,  of  the  University 
of  Basle 


THE  SINLESSNESS  OF  JESUS 

By  Professor  Max  Meyer,  Lie.  Theol.,  Gottberg, 

Germany 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  JESUS 

By  Professor  Karl  Beth,  of  the  University 
of  Berlin 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN  AND  THE 

SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS 

By  Professor  Fritz  Barth,  of  the  University 
of  Bern 


NEW  TESTAMENT  PARALLELS  IN 
BUDDHISTIC  LITERATURE 

By  Professor  Karl  Von  Hase,  of  the  University 
of  Breslau 


The  Gospel  of  St.  John 


AND   THE 


Synoptic  Gospels 


JUL  19  1922 


/. 


Bv 


i^oi 


£l/CAL  ^i>^^0^ 


FRITZ  BARTH 

professor  of  Theology  in  the  University  of  Bern 


NEW    YORK:     EATON    &    MAINS 
CINCINNATI :    JENNINGS  &  GRAHAM 


Copyright,  1907,  by 
EATON  &  MAINS. 


INTRODUCTION 

Whoever  undertakes  nowadays  to  advo- 
cate the  genuineness  and  credibility  of  the 
Gospel  of  John,  must  be  prepared  beforehand 
for  some  prominent  representatives  of  theo- 
logical science  and  several  among  their 
pupils  and  adherents  to  say  with  indignation 
or  pitiful  smile:  "Lost  effort!  It  is  the 
surest  of  the  sure,  that  the  fourth  Gospel  as 
an  historical  source  for  the  life  of  Jesus  is 
no  more  to  be  taken  into  account.  Who 
still  considers  it  as  such  is  under  the  spell 
of  church-tradition;  custom  goes  ahead  of 
truth;  he  has  no  idea  particularly  of  the 
religio-historical  method;  science  will  take 
precedence  over  him  in  the  order  of  the  day, 
as  over  everything  reactionary." 

This  sounds  very  suspicious,  and  whoever 
wishes  to  have  his  scientific  character  attest- 
ed by  authorities,  will  hesitate  to  invite  such 
powerful  opposition  and  anathema  against 
himself.  Nevertheless,  when  I  commit  this 
folly,  it  is  because  I  have  become  convinced 
during  the  many  years  of  my  study  of  the 


6  Introduction 

Gospel  of  John,  that  the  opinions  and 
prejudices  of  modern  times  have  exercised 
a  tyrannical  power  against  this  very  book, 
the  power  of  a  theological  school-tradition 
which  can  just  as  easily  mislead  the  inquirer 
as  the  ecclesiastical  tradition,  so  that  one 
overlooks  that  which  is  nearest  and  an- 
nounces the  most  improbable  as  a  result.  I 
turn  to  all  those  of  whatever  disposition  they 
may  be,  for  whom  the  mark  of  true  scientific 
method  consists  not  in  vast  conclusions  and 
vindications,  but  in  continuous,  penetrative 
work  on  the  problems  of  life. 

The  Johannean  question  belongs  to  the 
problems  of  life,  as  well  as  to  the  school  of 
history  and  of  literature.  The  Gospel  of 
John  is  not  one  of  those  bubbles  of  the  book 
market  which  for  a  few  seconds  change 
from  one  color  to  another,  and  then  explode. 
It  has  established  a  power  of  life  from  one 
century  to  another,  and  has  led  many  to  God. 
A  multitude  of  the  most  touching  and  beau- 
tiful facts  of  Church  history  are  connected 
with  passages  from  this  book;  and  to  this 
very  day,  even  the  most  zealous  opponent 
of  its  authenticity  cannot  but  refer  to  some 
of  its  words.    Its  "religious  importance"  is 


Introduction  7 

not  questioned ;  and  now  it  is  of  the  greatest 
importance  whether  these  powerful  effects 
proceeded  from  a  book  which  is  connected 
with  original  Christianity  in  only  an  ideal, 
derivative  relation,  which  would  refute 
Schleiermacher's  word,  that  every  historical 
whole  can  only  continue  through  the  same 
forces  by  which  it  is  originated — or, 
whether,  in  the  Gospel  of  John,  we  have  to 
deal  with  the  historical  Jesus  whose  real 
life  is  the  ground  of  our  faith,  in  a  real  world 
and  history,  and  whether  a  trustworthy  man 
speaks  to  us,  whose  book  and  manner  of 
spirit  stand  in  inner  relation  to  Jesus  of 
Nazareth. 

That  such  questions  touching  the  founda- 
tions of  our  Christian  faith  are  discussed 
today  more  than  ever,  and  even  interest 
larger  circles,  I  consider  not  as  a  misfortune 
but  as  an  altogether  serious  call  of  God  to 
the  Christian  Church  to  turn  from  all  sec- 
ondary things  to  Christ.  The  Church  and  its 
theology  have  been  used  too  long  to  establish 
an  artificial  foundation  for  the  certainty  of 
faith,  strangely  composed  of  Christian- 
sounding  truths  founded  on  reason,  of  bib- 
lical authority  and  ecclesiastical  usage.  This 


8  Introduction 

image  with  the  golden  head  and  feet  of  iron 
and  clay  has  not  proved  itself  to  be  durable. 
At  the  present  time  Christendom,  in  view  of 
the  questions  of  doubt  which  are  raised  on 
all  sides,  sees  itself  obliged  to  recollect  its 
true,  simple,  God-given  foundation,  and  to 
put  its  trust  no  longer  in  this  and  that — of 
which  we  may  read  in  the  Bible  and  else- 
where— but  in  Christ,  the  living  Lord,  the 
center  and  soul  of  the  Bible.  By  this  con- 
centration we  rather  gain  than  lose.  Faith 
in  God,  the  Father  of  Jesus  Christ,  will  in 
the  future  shine  clearer  than  ever  before,  and 
bring  salvation  to  many  who  now  despise  it ; 
that  they  may  no  more  be  offended  at  Chris- 
tians and  their  peculiarities,  no  more  doubt- 
ingly  and  scoldingly  insist  on  the  short- 
comings of  the  Church,  but  look  up  to  Jesus, 
and  in  imitation  of  him  find  the  purpose  of 
their  life.  But,  for  this  very  thing,  the  Gos- 
pel of  John  offers  the  best  help;  this  very 
book  drives  us  from  all  externality  and  im- 
perfection in  the  one  thing  which  is  of  im- 
portance, and  with  quiet  spiritual  power, 
brings  before  us  the  question:  "What  have 
you  in  Christ?"  "What  has  he  of  thee?" 
Now  concerning  this  Gospel  which  no  think- 


Introduction  9 

ing  man  could  pass  by  indifferently,  this 
"most  wonderful  of  all  religious  books,"  as 
Beidermann  called  it,  the  first  question  is, 
"Is  it  cr edible r  That  is.  Is  this  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  John  to  be  accepted  as  historical 
fact?  To  this  we  may  now  direct  our 
attention. 


THE  SELF-TESTIMONY  OF  THE 
GOSPEL  OF  JOHN 

The  fourth  Gospel  claims  to  have  been 
written  by  an  eye-witness  of  the  life  of  Jesus, 
whereas,  Luke  in  the  introduction  to  his 
Gospel  clearly  distinguishes  himself  from  the 
eye-witnesses  who  told  him  of  Jesus.  The 
fourth  evangelist  writes  just  as  distinctly: 
"We  beheld  his  glory"  (i.  14),  and  whoever 
would  refer  to  this  as  a  mere  mental  seeing 
is  opposed  by  the  beginning  of  the  first 
Epistle  of  John,  betraying  the  same  author 
as  to  language  and  contents,  where  we  read : 
"That  which  we  have  heard,  which  we  have 
seen,  w^ith  our  eyes,  which  we  have  looked 
upon  and  our  hands  have  handled  .  .  . 
declare  we  unto  you."  With  special  refer- 
ence to  the  events  immediately  after  the 
death  of  Jesus  it  is  said :  "And  he  that  saw 
it  bare  record,  and  his  record  is  true,  and  he 
knowxth  that  he  saith  true,  that  ye  might 
believe"  (John  19.  35).  Here  speaks  none 
other  than  the  evangelist  himself  who,  ac- 


12  The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

cording  to  his  custom  retained  throughout, 
determines  not  to  emerge  with  his  "I."  In 
the  most  unmistakable  manner  he  goes  to 
ocular  evidence  for  the  statement ;  and  it  is 
not  an  ordinary  disciple  who  speaks  here, 
but  one  who  indicates  that  he  was  especially- 
near  to  Jesus.  Frequently  a  disciple  is  men- 
tioned "whom  Jesus  loved";  at  the  Last 
Supper  the  same  was  leaning  on  Jesus's 
bosom  and  asks  him  about  the  betrayer  (13. 
23  seq.)  ;  with  the  women  he  stands  by  the 
cross  of  Jesus,  and  to  him  Jesus  gives  his 
mother  (19.  26  seq.).  On  Easter  morning  he 
hastens  to  the  sepulchre  and  convinces  him- 
self that  the  body  has  not  been  stolen  (20.  2 
seq. ) .  At  the  Lake  of  Gennesaret,  he  is  the 
first  to  see  the  Lord  and  receives  the  much- 
talked  of  promise  that  he  may  perhaps  live 
to  see  the  coming  of  Christ  (21.  7,  20  seq.). 
The  same  personality  is  probably  meant  by 
the  anonymous  disciple  who,  with  Andrew, 
first  finds  Jesus  by  the  Jordan  (i.  35  seq.) 
and  follows  Jesus  into  the  palace  of  the  high 
priest,  in  whose  house  he  was  known  (18.  15 
seq.).  This  "disciple  whom  Jesus  loved,"  is 
expressly  designated  at  the  close  of  the  book 
(21.  24)  as  the  author  of  the  book:  "This 


The  Self-Testimony  13 

is  the  disciple  which  testifieth  of  these  things, 
and  wrote  these  things]  and  we  know  that 
his  testimony  is  true."  The  "we,"  who 
speaks  here,  can  only  be  the  disciples  and 
friends  of  the  author  who  transmitted  his 
work  to  the  congregations  for  use ;  they  did 
not  deem  the  note  superfluous  that  the  book 
deserved  to  be  believed  as  the  testimony  of  a 
friend  of  Jesus.  It  is  also  significant  how, 
throughout,  the  same  person  appears  to- 
gether with  Peter,  the  best  known  in  the 
apostolic  circle.  Peter  asks  him  to  find  out 
the  name  of  the  betrayer;  Peter  goes  with 
him  into  the  court  of  the  high  priest,  and 
afterward  to  the  sepulchre;  Peter  swims  to 
the  shore  after  the  other  has  seen  the  Lord 
and  afterward  asks,  displeased :  "Lord,  and 
what  shall  this  man  do?"  Peter  becomes 
only  a  disciple  of  Jesus  after  the  other,  and 
denies  the  Lord,  whereas,  of  all  the  disciples 
this  other  is  alone  by  the  cross.  This  inti- 
mates that  the  author  must  be  sought  in  the 
closest  company  of  Jesus.  This  elect  circle, 
however,  consisted,  according  to  the  tradi- 
tion known  to  every  Christian,  of  Peter  and 
the  tw^o  sons  of  Zebedee,  James  and  John. 
Which  of  these  two  besides  Peter  could  be 


14         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

taken  into  account — was  also  to  be  learned 
from  the  history  of  the  beginnings,  which 
on  sundry  occasions  makes  Peter  and  John 
work  together  as  at  the  healing  of  the  lame 
man,  at  the  first  examination  before  the 
council,  and  at  the  preaching  in  Samaria 
(Acts  3.  I  seq. ;  4.  19  seq. ;  8.  14  seq. ;  comp. 
Luke  22,  8). 

These  facts  bring  us  before  the  dilemma — 
either  the  author  of  the  fourth  Gospel  is 
really  an  eye-witness  (and  indeed  most 
probably  John,  the  son  of  Zebedee),  or  he 
ajfrogated  to  himself  in  an  extremely  cun- 
ning manner  by  mysteriously  veiling  hints 
the  part  of  an  eye-witness,  and  carried  this 
through  over  against  Peter  with  a  certain 
malevolence;  and  that  he  also  found  good 
friends  who  were  ready  to  put  their  seal  on 
this  fraud  (for  it  would  mean  nothing  else), 
by  declaring  his  testimony  to  be  true,  know- 
ing it  to  be  false. 

For  the  first  there  is  not  only  our  immedi- 
ate impression  of  the  person  of  the  author, 
but  also  many  other  reasons.  The  Gospel 
contains  many  individual  traits  which  are 
entirely  unessential  for  the  course  of  history, 
but  which  explain  themselves  without  say- 


The  Self-Testimony  15 

ing  as  the  recollections  of  an  eye-witness. 
What  docs  it  matter  that  the  first  two  dis- 
ciples come  to  Jesus  at  four  o'clock?  (John 
I.  39)  ;  that  just  six  waterpots  of  stone  were 
at  the  marriage  in  Cana?  (2.  6)  ;  that  Jesus 
spoke  of  himself  as  the  Light  of  the  world 
in  the  Treasury?  (8.  20.)  But  the  lively 
recollection  of  a  narrator  who  really  experi- 
enced something,  asks  not  which  is  impor- 
tant or  unimportant,  he  simply  reproduces 
the  recollection-picture  also  in  its  secondary 
traits.  These  very  things  give  to  many 
descriptions  of  the  fourth  Gospel  a  great  dis- 
tinctness. Narratives  like  those  of  the  Sa- 
maritan woman,  of  the  man  born  blind,  of 
the  resurrection  of  Lazarus,  of  Mary  Mag- 
dalene at  the  sepulchre,  consummate  them- 
selves in  tangible  reality  before  our  eyes, 
and  will  always  set  before  the  Christian  the 
highest  tasks. 

The  language  of  the  Gospel  points  to  a 
member  of  the  primitive  church;  true  it  is 
written  in  Greek  for  Greek-speaking  readers, 
for  whom  Jewish  words  (i.  42,  43;  9.  7) 
and  customs  (2.  6;  19.  31,  40)  must  be  ex- 
plained; but  its  entire  mode  of  expression 
betrays  Semitic  thinking,  especially  the  many 


1 6         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

principal  clauses  connected  by  a  mere  "and," 
the  literal  repetition  of  things  already  said 
(i.  2,  25,  51;  4.  24;  8.  24;  16.  i6seq.),  the 
tendency  to  parallel  passages  in  which  a 
contrast  is  developed  (3.  18,  36;  5.  43;  8. 
23) ;  the  relatively  small  vocabulary  in 
which  some  leading  ideas  come  out  strongly. 
The  language  of  Job  has  its  closest  analogies 
not  in  the  writings  of  Hellenistic  Judaism, 
but  in  the  literature  of  Palestinian  scribism. 
That  the  Jewish  Christian  who  writes  here, 
as  an  eye-witness,  knew  what  he  was  about, 
can  be  seen  from  his  free  relation  to  the 
three  older  Gospels,  the  Synoptists  (Mat- 
thew, Mark  and  Luke).  He  knows  them,  as 
can  be  seen  from  many  details  of  his  narra- 
tive, and  he  presupposes  that  his  readers 
knew  them.  From  them  they  know  that 
John  baptized  (i.  25,  31),  and  was  cast 
into  prison  (3.  24),  that  Jesus  had  twelve 
disciples  (6.  6j,  70),  and  used  to  visit  Mar- 
tha and  Mary  (11.  i).  But  he  is  very  free 
in  his  deviation  from  the  synoptic  state- 
ments. He  not  only  omits  the  greatest  part 
of  what  they  narrated  and  puts  in  its  place 
other  facts  and  discourses,  but  transfers  also 
the  most  of  which  he  speaks  not  to  Galilee 


The  Self-Testimony  17 

but  to  the  south,  especially  to  Jerusalem; 
and  instead  of  one  passover  festival,  which 
the  synoptists  mention,  he  mentions  three 
(2.  13;  6.  4;  II.  55),  so  that  according  to 
him  the  public  ministry  of  Jesus  must  have 
lasted  from  two  to  three  years.  The  death 
of  Jesus,  according  to  him,  takes  place  on 
the  fourteenth  of  Nisan,  the  day  on  whose 
evening  the  Jewish  Passover  was  held  (18. 
28;  19.  14);  whereas,  the  synoptists  state 
that  on  that  evening,  Jesus  still  ate  the  Pass- 
over with  his  disciples  (Matt.  26.  17;  Mark 
14.  12;  Luke  22.  15),  and  was  crucified  on 
the  fifteenth  of  Nisan.  And  to  this  a  num- 
ber of  smaller  differences  with  regard  to  the 
time  of  the  cleansing  of  the  temple,  the 
anointing  at  Bethany,  the  crowning  with 
thorns  ...  in  connection  with  which  the 
author  himself  occasionally  presumes  an  in- 
timation that  the  synoptic  account  is  inaccu- 
rate, or  at  least  erroneous  (John  3.  24;  4. 
44).  All  these  deviations  from  the  current 
tradition  would  necessarily  cause  so  much 
shaking  of  the  head,  and  render  the  recep- 
tion of  the  Gospel  in  the  congregations  so 
very  difficult,  that  only  another  who  as  an 
important    eye-witness,    was    conscious    of 


i8         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

knowing  the  true  details,  could  nevertheless 
dare  to  make  them. 

In  reality  an  opposition  to  the  genuineness 
of  the  book  attached  itself  to  these  deviations 
in  the  second  century.  Certain  Christians  of 
Asia  Minor,  to  whom  Epiphanius  afterward 
applied  the  foolish  name  "Alogoi,"  objected 
that  the  order  of  events,  especially  in  the 
beginning  and  at  the  close  differed  consider- 
ably from  the  synoptic  picture,  and  asserted 
that  the  Gospel  was  written  by  the  Gnostic 
Cerinthus.  Some  leaders  of  the  church  at 
that  time  showed  some  inclination  to  agree 
with  this  statement,  for  the  very  people  who 
caused  the  church  fathers  the  most  perplexity 
relied  upon  the  Gospel  of  John.  The  Valen- 
tinians,  a  sect  of  the  Gnostics,  expressed 
their  speculations  on  deity,  world,  soul  and 
redemption  with  preference  for  Johannean 
formulas ;  and  the  Montanists,  who  preached 
the  near  coming  of  Christ,  and  in  view  of  it 
intended  to  collect  a  so-called  spiritual 
Church,  asserted  that  the  Comforter  prom- 
ised in  the  Gospel  of  John  spoke  through 
their  founder,  Montanus,  and  his  female  as- 
sociates. In  the  church  of  Asia  Minor  the 
custom   also    prevailed   of   celebrating   the 


The  Self-Testimony  19 

Lord's  Supper  for  the  time  being  on  the 
fourteenth  day  of  Nisan  of  the  Jewish  calen- 
dar in  commemoration  of  the  suffering  and 
death  of  the  Lord ;  and  it  was  said  that  this 
custom  was  traced  back  to  John.  Now  it 
could  only  cause  surprise  that  in  the  Gospel 
of  John  the  last  supper  of  Jesus  with  his  dis- 
ciples takes  place  rather  on  the  thirteenth  of 
Nisan.  That  the  church  overlooked  all  these 
difficulties  and  left  a  weapon  in  the  hands  of 
its  opponents  rather  than  surrender  the 
fourth  Gospel,  clearly  shows  that  the  church 
believed  that  it  had  proofs  of  its  credibility, 
and  well  felt  the  spiritual  difference  which 
existed  between  this  work  and  the  well- 
meant  but  little  valuable  literature  of  the 
second  century,  such  as  the  writings  of 
Clement,  Barnabas,  Ignatius,  Hermas, 
and  Papias. 

Slowly  but  surely  the  book  passed  into 
the  use  of  the  Church,  just  as  those  of  the 
Synoptists  and  also  the  Epistles  of  Paul. 
We  are  first  reminded  of  this  work  by  the 
"Apostolic  Fathers"  and  in  the  "Teaching 
of  the  Twelve  Apostles."  About  the  middle 
of  the  second  century  writers  of  Asia  Minor 
and  the  apologist  Justin  quote  already  some 


20         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

passages  without  mentioning  the  author.  A 
few  decades  later  it  appears  as  the  fourth 
Gospel  beside  the  synoptists  in  the  New 
Testament  canon,  and  is  applied  as  holy- 
Scripture  (by  Theophilus  and  Irenseus), 
yea,  is  already  quoted  against  synoptic  state- 
ments by  Melito  and  Apollinaris  of  Hierapo- 
lis.  The  opinion  is  confirmed  that  it  was 
written  down  by  the  aged  apostle  John  at 
Ephesus  toward  the  end  of  his  life  at  the 
wish  of  his  friends;  and  it  was  praised  as 
the  pneumatic  gospel  which  doubtless  origi- 
nated under  special  inspiration  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  It  was  especially  esteemed  as  abso- 
lute authority  in  the  controversies  which 
already  broke  out  in  the  second  century  con- 
cerning the  person  of  Christ,  and  which  were 
prolonged  to  the  seventh  century.  It  be- 
came the  fundamental  book  for  the  forma- 
tion of  the  Christ-dogma,  and  Luther  calls 
it  "the  only  tender,  true,  principal  Gospel, 
to  be  much  preferred  to  the  other  three  and 
more  highly  esteemed." 


II 

REASONS  AGAINST  ITS 
CREDIBILITY 

In  strong  contrast  with  this  special  es- 
teem of  the  Gospel  of  John  stands  the  con- 
trary opinion  which  became  current  in  the 
nineteenth  century  through  theologians  like 
Bretschneider,  Baur,  Hilgenfeld,  Keim,  et  al, 
and  which  may  be  thus  briefly  summed  up : 
"This  book  narrates  not  actual  facts  which 
took  place,  but  is  only  a  didactic  writing  on 
the  theme  that  Jesus  is  the  divine  logos  who 
appeared  in  the  flesh,  and  that  its  author  was 
not  an  apostle  and  eye-witness,  but  some  un- 
known Christian  of  the  second  century  who, 
in  the  form  of  a  narrative  about  Christ,  gave 
his  impressions  of  the  essence  and  work  of 
Christianity."  This  modern  opposition  to  the 
Gospel,  by  which  it  is  directly  eliminated 
from  the  sources  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  is  es- 
pecially based  upon  its  relation  to  the  synop- 
tists,  and  two  points  are  here  particularly  to 
be  mentioned.  In  the  first  place  it  is  said: 
"The  synoptic  Gospels  describe  Jesus  as  the 


'22         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

son  of  his  people  and  child  of  his  time,  as  the 
great  prophet  and  popular  preacher  of 
Nazareth,  who  proclaims  the  kingdom  of 
God  and  heals  the  sick,  who  soon  gets  into 
conflict  with  the  ruling  Pharisaic  party;  is 
forsaken  by  the  people  and  crucified  as  the 
false  Messiah.  This  is  a  truly  human  bio- 
graphical portrait  to  which  nothing  human 
of  successes  and  disappointments  had  been 
strange.  The  Johannean  Christ,  on  the 
other  hand,  is  a  divine  being  who  comes 
from  heaven  to  earth  and  never  becomes 
natural  in  it.  As  a  strange  guest  he  walks 
among  men  and  makes  men  feel  his  superi- 
ority; he  performs  great  miracles,  not  out 
of  compassion  for  the  distress  but  to  let 
his  glory  shine  and  to  combine  with  it  pro- 
found applications  to  the  spiritual  life.  He 
delivers  long  discourses,  not  for  the  sake 
of  instructing  the  people,  languishing  un- 
der the  ban  of  legalism,  in  the  righteous- 
ness of  the  kingdom  of  God  and  of  bring- 
ing near  to  them  the  Father  in  heaven,  but 
mainly  for  the  sake  of  deposing  to  his  divine 
origin  and  demanding  acknowledgment  of 
the  same.  He  speaks  of  himself  in  images, 
calls  himself  the  Bread  of  Life,  the  Light, 


Reasons  Against  Its  Credibility  23 

the  Vine,  and  is  indignant  when  his  hints 
are  misunderstood.  He  treats  his  Jewish 
countrymen  Hke  strangers,  yea,  hke  children 
of  the  devil,  whose  destruction  is  certain  and 
deserving.  He  hardly  notices  objections ;  he 
speaks  no  parable  to  illustrate  his  teachings ; 
his  demeanor  is  dignified  and  solemn,  but 
cold  and  noble,  and  this  trait  is  retained  in 
the  history  of  the  passion  and  resurrection. 
His  disciples  are  not  saved  sinners  but  truth- 
ful men  who  feel  attracted  to  him ;  the  good 
come  to  him,  not  the  lost.  He  himself  passes 
through  no  development.  From  the  begin- 
ning he  is  the  Son  of  God  and  the  Messiah 
who  knows  all  things  and  is  hardly  in  need 
of  praying  for  himself.  All  these  strange 
traits  come  from  this,  that  from  the  begin- 
ning Jesus  is  perceived  as  a  superhuman  per- 
sonality, as  the  Logos.  This  notion,  however, 
comes  from  the  writings  of  the  Jew  Philo 
of  Alexandria;  he  has  nothing  in  common 
with  the  historical  Jesus."  In  the  second 
place  it  is  stated:  *'The  discourses  of  Jesus 
in  the  Gospel  of  John,  according  to  form 
and  contents,  have  throughout  the  stamp  of 
the  Johannean  mode  of  speech,  not  of  the 
synoptic  Jesus,  as  he  comes  before  us,  that 


24         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

is,  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  Jesus  and 
John  the  Baptist  speak  here  just  as  the 
author  speaks  in  his  prologue  and  in  his 
Epistles,  seldom  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  of 
repentance  and  righteousness,  but  the  more 
of  light  and  darkness,  life  and  death,  truth 
and  falsehood,  heaven  and  earth,  God  and 
the  world,  these  monotonously  recurring 
pet-notions  of  the  author,  which  reflect  his 
dualistic  conception  of  the  world.  This  con- 
trast between  the  upper  and  lower  world  has 
removed  the  early  Christian  contrast  be- 
tween the  present  and  future  time,  and 
brought  about  a  strong  spiritualization  of 
the  synoptic  eschatology,  so  that  its  essential 
elements  (resurrection,  judgment,  eternal 
life)  appear  as  already  realized  through 
Jesus." 

Thus  read  the  charges  and  when  we  ask : 
How  could  one  be  induced  in  the  second 
century  to  undertake  this  strange  remodel- 
ling of  the  life  of  Jesus  from  the  human  into 
the  divine,  from  the  simple  into  the  noble, 
from  the  Jewish  into  the  commonly  human, 
we  are  answered  by  various  suppositions. 
According  to  some  the  author  was  a  Gnostic 
(perhaps  Meander  in  Antioch)  who  wished 


Reasons  Against  Its  Credibility  25 

to  recommend  with  this  "Gospel  of  Truth" 
his  philosophico-purified  Christianity.  Ac- 
cording to  the  others  the  author  wishes 
rather  to  oppose  the  Gnostics,  by  putting 
against  them  a  better,  ecclesiastical  Gnosis. 
Others  find  in  the  book  a  concealed  polemic 
against  Judaism  which  would  not  recognize 
Jesus  as  the  Messiah.  Still  others  read  in 
the  prologue  and  first  chapters  a  special  ten- 
dency against  the  communion  of  the  dis- 
ciples of  John,  of  whom  trace  is  preserved 
in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  (18.  25 ;  19.  3). 
One  even  obsei-ves  that  in  the  Gospel  of 
John  the  second  century  with  its  struggles 
is  reflected — the  victorious  march  of  the 
Gospel  through  the  provinces  of  the  Roman 
empire,  the  last  convulsions  of  Judaism  un- 
der Bar-kochba,  the  origin  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  the  problems  of  its  apologetics. 
It  remains  indeed  a  strange  expedient,  boldly 
to  impute  about  the  year  no  or  140  some- 
thing of  an  imposing  splendor  to  the  his- 
torical picture  of  Jesus,  which  Jews  or 
heathen  might  miss  and  by  that  carry  on  an 
apology  of  Christianity.  On  this  account 
many  of  the  opponents  of  the  genuineness  of 
the  Gospel  did  not  get  rid  of  the  thought 


26  The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

that  in  this  Gospel  some  recollections  from 
the  time  of  Jesus  must  at  least  have  been 
utilized.  A  Christian  of  Asia  Minor,  it  is 
supposed,  put  together  communications  of  a 
disciple  from  Jerusalem,  or  a  collection  of 
discourses  being  current  under  the  name  of 
John  was  intertwined  by  a  later  redaction 
with  narratives,  or  the  author  of  the  whole  is 
indeed  a  John,  but  not  the  apostle.  The  son 
of  Zebedee  had  never  left  Palestine  but,  ac- 
cording to  the  prophecy  of  Jesus :  "Ye  shall 
indeed  drink  of  the  cup  that  I  drink  of ;  and 
with  the  baptism  that  I  am  baptized  withal 
shall  ye  be  baptized"  (Mark  lo.  39).  He  was 
"killed  by  the  Jews"  according  to  a  notice 
by  Papias,  like  his  brother  James  (Acts  12. 
2).  The  Gospel  was  not  written  by  him  but 
by  the  presbyter  John  in  Ephesus,  whom 
Papias  knew.  But  against  this  also  impor- 
tant doubts  arise :  the  Gospel  is  a  work  of  one 
cast,  a  fact  which  is  now  opposed  by  the 
popular  theory  of  separate  sources.  To 
draw  inferences  from  assertions  of  the 
credulous  Papias,  means  to  build  castles  in 
the  air  and  light  up  the  dark  with  the  darker. 
To  keep  away  the  apostle  John  from  Asia 
Minor  is  a  coup  of  despair,  since  the  state- 


Reasons  Against  Its  Credibility  27 

ments  of  Irenaeus,  Polycrates  and  Apol- 
lonius  in  the  second  century  cannot  be  re- 
moved. Further  such  a  mighty  alteration 
of  the  evangehcal  tradition  by  any  disciple 
the  Church  of  Asia  Minor  would  have  hardly 
stood.  But  is  not  the  authority  of  the 
Apostle  already  disproved  by  the  two  rea- 
sons mentioned  above? 


Ill 

THE  SECRET  OF  THE  PERSON 
OF  JESUS 

The  answer  to  the  question  just  asked  will 
depend  on  the  notion  which  one  has  of  the 
divine  revelation  to  mankind.  There  was  a 
time  when  one  supposed  it  to  be  virtually  a 
sum  of  doctrines  on  God  and  man,  communi- 
cated by  the  Holy  Ghost,  written  down  by 
the  authors  of  the  biblical  books  authentic- 
ally interpreted  by  ecclesiastical  dogma. 
This  notion,  however,  is  unbiblical  and  mis- 
leading. It  is  a  blessing  for  the  church  that 
this  wooden,  soulless  idea  of  revelation  is 
wrested  out  of  its  hand  through  the  entire 
course  of  modern  theology.  God  is  no 
theorem,  no  mere  idea,  no  postulate,  but  the 
material  ground  of  all  things  as  the  infinite 
creative  personality,  the  eternal  Love.  When 
this  God  intended  to  reveal  Himself,  doc- 
trines and  letters  were  too  small  as  organs  of 
his  self-communication ;  it  had  to  take  place 
rather  through  personalities  whose  whole 
life  was  an  attestation  of  God  to  their  con- 


Secret  of  the  Person  of  Jesus   29 

temporaries,  because  they  spoke  and  taught 
in  his  own  power:  "God  who  at  sundry 
times  and  in  divers  manners  spake  in  time 
past  unto  the  fathers  by  the  prophets,  hath 
in  these  days  spoken  unto  us  by  the  Son" 
(Heb.  I.  i),  and  when  he  selected  for  him- 
self continuators  of  his  work,  he  said  to  one 
of  them:  "Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this 
rock  I  w'ill  build  my  Church'*  (Matt.  16. 
18)  ;  thou  art  to  become  the  personality 
forming  the  foundation  of  my  Church,  as  he 
indeed  became,  not  as  first  pope,  but  as  the 
preacher  on  the  Day  of  Pentecost  and  leader 
of  the  primitive  church.  Men,  w^ho  suffered 
themselves  to  be  apprehended  of  God  and 
who  spent  their  lives  in  his  service  for  their 
fellow-men  remained  to  this  day  the  organs 
by  which  God  conveys  object-lessons  to  man- 
kind; that  he  lives  and  rules  as  of  old. 
Where  such  witnesses  are  lacking,  the  most 
ingenious  proofs,  the  best  books  will  always 
leave  behind  the  impression  of  insufficiency. 
It  is  an  advantage  of  modern  research  that 
it  suffers  itself  to  be  led,  especially  through 
the  figures  of  the  Old  Testament,  to  see  this 
importance  of  personalities;  to  apprehend 
them   also   with  the   average   standard   in 


30         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

hand  it  cannot  comprehend  their  attitude 
when  it  is  opposed  by  the  mystery  of  per- 
sonal life,  the  indefinable,  enigmatical,  and 
apparently  contradictory.  One  gradually 
learns  not  to  condemn  it  immediately  as 
disease  or  fiction,  because  the  great  and  sub- 
lime shines  upon  us  in  the  incalculable,  and 
inimitable.  But  it  must  not  be  expected  that 
this  insight  is  everywhere  asserted.  What  is 
conceded  to  a  Jeremiah,  a  Mohammed  or  a 
Francis  of  Assisi,  can  not  be  refused  to  the 
personalities  of  the  New  Testament,  to  a 
Paul  and  a  John,  and  above  all  to  Jesus.  It 
is  a  fatal  mistake  that  those  most  powerful 
in  the  kingdom  of  the  spirit,  are  again  and 
again  examined  in  a  pedantic  manner,  as  to 
supposed  contradictions,  and  that  that  which 
puzzles  the  personal  taste  of  the  compiler,  is 
resolutely  adjudicated  from  them.  Thus  we 
have  had  quite  a  number  of  Jesus-figures: 
the  smart  politician  of  Reimarus;  the  en- 
lightened moralizer  of  rationalism ;  the  meek 
Nazarene  of  Renan;  the  ecstatic  of  O. 
Holtzmann;  the  unreal  Jesus  of  Kalthoff, 
etc.  But  the  portrait  of  Jesus  in  the  Gospels 
has  ever  silently  resisted  this  effort  and  shall 
do  so  in  future.     The  personality  of  Jesus 


Secret  of  the  Person  of  Jesus   31 

proves  itself  again  and  again  so  great  and 
comprehensive,  that  each  editor  of  his  Hfe 
can  well  point  out  in  it  some  traits  but  misses 
the  mark  when  he  imagines  that  he  can  omit 
other  traits  less  congenial  to  him.  It  is  not 
science  but  prejudice,  to  declare  war  es- 
pecially on  the  mysterious  as  such,  on  the 
miraculous  in  principle. 

Applied  to  the  Johannean  question  it 
means :  the  objections  to  the  credibility  of  the 
Gospel  of  John,  can  appear  forcibly  only  to 
him  who  has  made  clear  to  himself  the  im- 
portance of  the  personal  element  in  Jesus 
and  in  John,  and  perceives  both  as  a  given, 
fathomed  quantity,  whose  relation  to  a  book 
like  the  fourth  Gospel  can  be  settled  with 
all  certainty.  "But  we  know  both"  it  is 
said  "from  the  synoptlsts  and  with  these  the 
description  of  the  fourth  Gospel  does  not 
tally !"     This  is  just  the  question. 

As  concerns  Jesus,  it  is  a  critical  condition 
for  the  opponents  of  the  Gospel  of  John, 
that  in  the  synoptic  Gospels  also  they  must 
declare  a  great  many  traits  which  point  to 
the  Johannean  direction  as  unhistorical  or 
put  there  in  the  background.  I  mean  here 
not   the   synoptic  passages   from  which   it 


32  The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

can  be  indirectly  shown  that  Jesus  was  in- 
deed more  than  once  in  Jerusalem,  and  in 
fact  died  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  Nisan. 
Upon  such  outpost  engagements  we  will  not 
dwell.  I  rather  refer  to  the  main  point,  the 
picture  of  Christ  of  the  synoptists.  Is  the 
same  humanly  genial,  that  everything  is 
completely  spent  in  a  "purely  historical" 
consideration  ?  Not  at  all.  The  same  Jesus 
who,  as  the  meek  Son  of  man  and  popular 
itinerant  preacher  seeks  the  lost  sheep  of 
Israel,  has  besides  all  this  an  indescribable 
eminence  in  his  appearance  also  in  the 
synoptists.  The  demoniacs  cry  out  when 
they  meet  him  (Matt.  8.  29;  Mark  i.  24)  ; 
the  people  are  greatly  astonished  at  him 
(Matt.  7.  28;  Mark  i.  27)  ;  even  the  disci- 
ples have  this  feeling  (Matt.  8.  27;  Mark  6. 
51);  Peter  said  to  him :  "Depart  from  me ; 
for  I  am  a  sinful  man,  O  Lord!"  (Luke  5. 
8  seq.)  ;  the  centurion  of  Capernaum  is 
afraid  to  invite  Jesus  to  his  house  (Matt.  8. 
8)  ;  the  people  of  Nazareth  respectfully  make 
room  for  him  as  he  passes  through  the  midst 
of  men  (Luke  4.  30)  ;  the  Pharisees  see  in  his 
work  the  power  of  devils  (Matt.  12.  24  seq.)  ; 
Herod  thinks  with  trembling  that  the  Bap- 


Secret  of  the  Person  of  Jesus  33 

tist  is  risen  from  the  dead  (Matt.  14.  i  seq.)  ; 
at  the  death  of  Jesus  the  centurion  exclaims : 
'Truly  this  man  was  the  Son  of  God'*  (Mark 
15-  39)-  On  the  other  hand,  sons  of  his 
people  forsake  everything  at  his  word  and 
follow  him  (Matt.  4.  19  seq.;  9.  9),  even 
though  he  imposes  on  them  the  greatest 
sacrifices  and  renunciations  (5.  29  seq.;  8. 
22\  19.  21 ;  Luke  9.  (^2\  14.  25  seq.)  ;  great 
multitudes  gather  unto  him  (Mark  4.  i ; 
Luke  12.  i),  and  numerous  sick  become 
,sound  by  his  word  and  his  touch,  so  that  the 
multitudes  glorified  God  (Matt.  9.  8;  Luke 
7.  16).  If  we  ask  for  the  reason  of  this  im- 
pression of  Jesus  upon  the  people,  we  find  it 
at  any  rate  not  only  in  these  miraculous 
deeds,  but  in  the  powerful  authority  with 
which  Jesus  spoke.  With  a  quiet  decision  he 
declares  who  shall  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  (Matt.  18.  3;  19.  14;  Mark  12.  34), 
the  poor,  the  hungry,  the  wretched  whose 
fate  seemed  to  represent  the  very  outcast  to 
the  kingdom  of  God  (Luke  6.  20  seq.). 

He  puts  himself  in  opposition  to  the  tradi- 
tion of  the  scribes  (Matt.  9.  15;  15.  3  seq.), 
even  to  the  very  letter  of  the  law  (5.  32 ;  15. 
1 1 ;  19.  4  seq.)  ;  with  his  powerful  "but  I  say 


34  The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

unto  you"  he  deepens  the  demand  of  Jewish 
legality  into  a  moraHty  of  the  heart  spring- 
ing from  rehgion  (5.  22  seq.).  He  knows 
himself  entitled  to  forgive  sins  (9.  2  seq.; 
Luke  7.  48  seq.)  and  to  give  all  that  labor 
rest  of  soul  (Matt.  11.  28  seq.).  He  prom- 
ises heavenly  reward  (5.  12;  10.  42;  19.  29; 
Luke  14.  14)  for  all  that  which  is  done  and 
suffered  "for  my  sake"  (Matt.  5.  11 ;  10.  18, 
22\  24.  9);  but  just  as  plainly  also  ever- 
lasting destruction  for  those  who  refuse  his 
message  and  despise  his  admonitions  (5. 
26  seq.;  10.  15,  28;  11.  22  seq.;  12.  36  seq.; 
13.  42  seq. ;  18.  6  seq. ;  25.  46). 

Li  his  last  hours  he  still  announces  to  his 
unjust  judges  their  defeat  {26,  64),  but 
promises  paradise  to  the  penitent  thief  (Luke 
23. 43).  With  royal  independence  he  desists 
from  being  understood  by  his  family  (Matt. 
12.  46  seq.;  13.  57;  Luke  11.  28),  and  an- 
nounces judgment  to  his  people  if  they  do 
not  repent  (Matt.  8.  10  seq. ;  12.  39,  45 ;  23. 
'T^j  seq.:  Luke  13.  3  seq.).  How  aristo- 
cratic in  the  best  sense  is  his  reply 
to  Herod  Antipas  who  meant  to  frighten 
him  away  (Luke  13.  32  seq.) ;  how 
dignified  his  silence  before  Caiaphas,  Pilate 


Secret  of  the  Person  of  Jesus  35 

and  Herod!  (Matt.  26.  6^;  Mark  15.  5; 
Luke  23.  9.)  But  the  same  Jesus  could  also 
speak  with  holy  indignation  (Matt.  2^,  13 
seq. ;  Mark  3.  5)  and  with  telling  invectives 
(Matt.  16.  23 ;  Luke  9.  55),  especially  where 
he  saw  the  profane  in  the  holy  place,  as  in 
the  house  of  Jairus  and  the  cleansing  of  the 
temple  (Matt.  9.  25;  21.  12). 

He  was  not  afraid  occasionally  to  express 
in  a  strange  and  unmistakable  manner  that 
which  was  to  go  to  the  heart,  to  cause  reflec- 
tion thereby  ( 5.  29  seq. ;  8.  22 ;  1 5.  1 1 ;  16.  6 ; 
25.  29).  To  his  hearers  he  promised  perse- 
cution and  sufferings  instead  of  splendid 
Messianic  days,  w^ithout  fearing  the  bad  im- 
pression of  such  expressions  (5.  10  seq.; 
10.  16  seq.,  38  seq.;  13.  21;  16.  24  seq.). 
He  knew  that  though  he  had  to  suffer  the 
cross,  that  his  words  would  remain,  "though 
heaven  and  earth  pass  away"  (24.35).  And 
his  authority  Jesus  derived  from  his  relation 
to  God.  He  speaks  not  as  the  scribes  miser- 
ably subtilizing  and  scheming  ordinances, 
but  like  one  who  has  power  from  God,  and 
draws  from  the  full  (7.  29).  He  knows  that 
the  prayer  of  faith  is  heard  by  God  (7.  7 
seq.;  Luke  18.  7  seq.;  Mark  11.  24  seq.). 


^6         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

He  knows  when  God  forgives  and  when  not 
(Matt.  5.  25  seq.;  6.  14  seq.;  18.  35;  15.  20 
seq.;  18.  14). 

He  knows  how  God  shall  judge  man 
(7.  21;  25.  21),  and  why  he  lets  him  alone 
so  long  (13.  30;  Luke  13.  8).  He  knows 
God's  thoughts  concerning  men,  and  he 
understands  his  rule  (Matt.  5.  45;  6.  8, 
32;  II.  25  seq.),  from  intimate  communion 
with  him,  just  as  he  sees  through  the  hearts 
and  thoughts  of  men  with  a  divinely  quick- 
ened look  (9.  4;  22.  18).  His  disciples 
noticed  how  often  he  retired  to  solitude  for 
silent  prayer  before  God  (Mark  i.  35 ;  Luke 
II.  i),  and  how  he  knew  to  speak  to  them 
of  mysterious  experiences  with  God,  from 
which  he  derived  the  proof  that  he  was  the 
one  chosen  of  God  (Matt.  3.  16),  that  he 
overcame  Satan  (4.  11 ;  12.  29;  10.  18  seq.), 
and  will  die  for  the  redemption  of  men  (20. 
2^]  26.  28)  ;  but  being  glorified  by  God  (17. 
I  seq.),  shall  return  again  (16.  2y  seq.;  24. 
30)  as  judge  of  the  world  (7.  22  seq.;  13. 
41;  19.  28;  25.  31  seq.).  They  could  not 
explain  to  themselves  this  iron  confidence. 
They  felt,  indeed,  that  their  Master  spoke 
and  worked  in  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit 


Secret  of  the  Person  of  Jesus   37 

(4.  i;  12.  28;  Luke  4.  14);  but  also  just 
as  clearly  that  every  comparison  with  the  in- 
spired man  of  the  old  covenant  fails  here. 
Jesus  himself  attributed  to  his  person  an 
importance,  as  no  other  prophet  had  claimed. 
He  demanded  that  one  should  confess 
him  before  men  (Matt.  10.  32)  ;  he  declared 
that  the  relation  to  him  would  decide  at  the 
last  judgment  (25.  35  seq.),  because  the 
entire  work  of  salvation  ( 1 1.  27 ;  28.  18)  for 
all  mankind  even  outside  of  Israel  (8.  11; 
21.  43;  24.  14;  28.  19)  is  given  to  him. 
Capernaum  would  be  punished  more  severely 
than  Sodom  ( 1 1 .  2 1  seq. ) .  The  Son  of  Man 
is  more  than  the  temple  (12.  6)  ;  he  is  also 
Lord  of  the  Sabbath  (12.  8).  He  is  more 
than  Jonas  and  Solomon  (12.  41  seq.)  for 
he  brings  that  which  prophets  and  kings 
have  only  longed  for  without  experiencing 
it  (Luke  10.  24) .  Even  the  Messianic  Name 
— "Son  of  David" — is  too  humble  for  him 
(Matt.  22.  41  seq.). 

On  the  other  hand,  his  disciples  are 
through  him  more  than  prophets  and  right- 
eous men  (to.  41  seq.)  ;  the  least  in  heaven 
is  greater  than  John  the  Baptist  who,  among 
all  men  before  Jesus,  is  the  greatest  (11.  11 


38         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

seq.).  If  his  own  are  so  highly  esteemed 
before  God,  how  much  more  he  himself! 
He  who  receives  him,  receives  God,  who 
sent  him  (10.  40)  ;  for  he  is  not  a  servant 
and  subject  like  the  others,  but  the  Son 
of  the  Father  (21.  37  seq. ;  17.  26;  Mark 
13.  32)  who  can  say:  "No  man  knoweth 
the  Son,  but  the  Father;  neither  knoweth 
any  man  the  Father,  save  the  Son,  and  he 
to  whomsoever  the  Son  will  reveal  Him!" 
(Matt.  II.  2y\  Luke  10.  22.^  The  ex- 
perience that  God  the  Father  is  in  heaven 
is  connected  with  the  divine  revelation  which 
the  gracious  will  of  Jesus  brings  to  man; 
whoever  wishes  to  experience  God  as  the 
helper  for  body  and  soul,  must  trust  in  Jesus ; 
he  must  believe  (Matt.  8.  10;  9.  28;  15.  28; 
18.  6;  Mark  5.  36;  9.  23;  Luke  18.  42). 
And  when  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  believing 
on  him,  meet,  he  gives  them  this  promise: 
"Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together 
in  my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of 
them"  (Matt.  18.  20),  "and,  lo,  I  am  with 
you  a! way,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world" 
(28.  20). 

I  well  know  that  an  effort  has  been  made 
to  eliminate  this  whole  series  of  synoptic 


Secret  of  the  Person  of  Jesus  39 

traits  from  the  authentic  Hfe-picture  of 
Jesus,  by  means  of  the  most  varied  argu- 
ments ;  but  this  means  to  mutilate  the  synop- 
tic Christ,  not  to  describe  him.  Agreed 
also  that  the  Jesus  of  the  first  three  Gospels 
not  "wholly  belongs  to  the  side  of  man- 
kind," and  not  only  "surpasses  by  the  call 
peculiar  to  him  only,'*  his  fellow  creatures 
but  according  to  his  entire  personality  is  a 
mystery,  and  indeed  a  divine  mystery,  wdiich 
no  human  definition  will  ever  exhaust,  be- 
cause God  alone  fathoms  it.  But  faith 
looks  into  it  inquiringly  and  rejoices  in  the 
unspeakable  gift  of  God. 


IV 

THE  PERSONALITY  OF  JOHN 

The  uniqueness  of  the  person  of  Jesus 
shows  itself  also  in  the  manner  in  which  he 
affected  his  disciples.  We  should  already 
be  thankful  to  them  if,  after  the  manner  of 
the  disciples  of  the  Jewish  rabbis,  they  had 
retained  his  words  and  had  always  repeated 
them  for  the  instruction  of  the  new  members 
joining  the  congregation.  But  more  than 
this  happened.  It  is  a  saying:  "When  the 
kings  build,  the  carters  are  busy";  but  this 
King  in  the  kingdom  of  the  Spirit,  proved 
his  claim  on  the  human  race  by  this,  that  he 
not  only  employed  carters  and  beggars,  but 
created  personalities  in  each  of  which  some- 
thing of  his  essence  and  work  was  reflected 
'as  the  contents  of  the  whole  life  of  a  dis- 
ciple. Jesus  did  not  send  stenographers, 
copyists  and  instantaneous  photographers 
into  the  world  as  witnesses  of  his  life,  but 
men  in  whom  his  word,  his  mode  of  think- 
ing, his  life-work,  his  Spirit  had  assumed  a 

personal  figure.    This  could  only  take  place 
40 


.The  Personality  of  John        41 

after  the  life  of  Jesus  had  found  its  earthly 
close  by  his  death  on  the  cross  and  his  resur- 
rection. Until  then  his  impress  on  the  dis- 
ciples was  always  dimmed  by  the  Jewish 
Messianic  expectations  which  they  associ- 
ated with  his  person  (Mark  10.  37;  Acts  i. 
6).  They  had  heard  and  seen  him,  but  only 
through  the  medium  of  their  wishes,  and  it 
is  not  always  that  "seeking  and  desiring" 
are  a  guarantee  of  the  right  way.  One  can 
also  pursue  phantoms  in  which  very  un- 
reasonable desires  clothe  themselves.  But 
now  the  work  of  Jesus  was  before  them  as  a 
whole ;  they  could  see  what  he  brought  and 
what  he  did  not  bring.  In  the  light  of  his 
death  only  they  understood  many  of  his 
words,  whereas  they  had  formerly  taxed  the 
patience  of  Jesus  by  their  lack  of  under- 
standing (Mark  4.  13;  6.  52;  8.  17;  9.  32). 
Now  his  Spirit  could  freely  rule  in  them  by 
means  of  the  adopted  w^ords  and  the  under- 
stood ministries  of  Jesus.  Helpless  young 
men  became  strong  men  in  Christ.  How 
variously  this  happened  the  very  synoptic 
Gospels  prove  with  their  differing  coloring 
of  the  Christ-picture  which  is  not  at  all  acci- 
dental but  which  rests  on  the  reflection  and 


42        The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

memory  of  the  first  Christians.     This  of 
course  we  find  nowhere  else. 

In  the  words  of  Jesus,  however,  one  had 
found  simply  "trust  in  God,  purity  of  heart, 
mercy,  humility,  placability  and  nothing 
else."  But  these  demands  upon  men  have 
never  been  and  never  will  be  the  whole  of 
Christianity.  To  be  sure  the  Gospel  of  Mark 
shows  us  how  in  the  recollection  of  many 
Christians  Jesus  lived  on  preeminently  as  the 
great  miracle-worker,  as  the  helper  and 
saviour  sent  from  God,  who  finally  died  for 
the  salvation  of  men;  as  the  glorious  hero 
who  in  the  power  of  God  overcame  Satan. 
In  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  the  life  of  Jesus 
moves  in  the  light  of  prophecy  and  fulfill- 
ment, which  was  of  vital  interest  for  Jewish 
Christians.  Here  Jesus  is  the  promised 
Messiah  of  Israel,  the  Lawgiver  and  King  in 
the  kingdom  of  heaven;  the  founder  of  the 
new  covenant-people  in  whom  words  and 
deeds  unite  in  a  wondrous  whole.  The  Gos- 
pel of  Luke,  however,  causes  the  Jewish 
background  of  the  life  of  Jesus  to  recede,  and 
the  author,  dwelling  the  more  earnestly  on 
that  whereby  Christ  affects  man  in  general, 
his  mercy  toward  the  poor  and  the  outcasts, 


The  Personality  of  John        43 

awakens  a  spirit  which  finds  response   in 
every  human  soul. 

But  the  masterpiece  of  the  transfoiTn- 
ing  power  of  the  exalted  Lord  is  Paid,  the 
disciple,  who  never  knew  Jesus  in  his  earthly 
Hfe,  and  for  all  details  of  that  life  had 
to  depend  on  the  communications  of  eye- 
witnesses. The  appearance  of  Jesus  on  the 
way  to  Damascus  placed  Paul  immediately 
face  to  face  with  the  final  result  of  the 
life  of  Jesus.  He  now  saw  him  whom  he 
had  thus  far  hated  and  despised  as  the  cruci- 
fied one  in  his  exalted  state.  From  this  fact, 
from  retrospection,  he  w^as  compelled  to  in- 
quire into  the  mystery  of  the  work  and  per- 
son of  Jesus,  and  as  a  result,  leaving  out  of 
sight  the  non-essential,  he  apprehended 
Jesus  as  he  who  had  died  for  our  sins  and 
rose  again  as  the  author  of  a  new  life  in  the 
Spirit.  This  very  Paul  was  called  to  explain 
the  gospel  in  its  eternal  power  to  all  men  as 
none  other  before  him  could  do.  His  life, 
rich  in  labor,  in  the  communion  with  the 
exalted  Christ,  gave  sufficient  proof  that  the 
permanence  of  Christianity  does  not  depend 
on  tlie  wording  of  certain  recollections  from 
the  life  of  Jesus,  but  on  the  personal  work- 


44         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

ing  of  the  historical  Jesus  in  personaHties 
who  are  converted  and  regenerated  by  him. 
Paul  is  not  the  second  founder  of  Christian- 
ity. He  is  its  powerful  pioneer  on  mission- 
ary ways  and  theological  lines  of  thought, 
which  the  disciples  had  not  yet  even  thought 
of.  His  whole  being  is  prophecy ;  what  great 
and  unexpected  things  the  living  Christ 
would  work  in  the  human  race  far  beyond 
the  limits  of  his  historical  appearance;  how 
gloriously  the  mystery  of  the  Gospel  will 
unfold  itself  to  coming  generations  under 
the  guidance  of  his  Spirit. 

The  best  in  this  respect  was  done  by  John, 
the  man  who  speaks  to  us  in  the  fourth  Gos- 
pel. Far  be  it  from  me  to  delineate  a  picture 
of  his  life  and  development,  but  we  must 
just  as  little  pass  by  the  hints  which  his 
writings  and  the  rest  of  the  New  Testament 
give  us.  The  synoptic  Gospels  describe  the 
son  of  Zebedee,  John,  the  fisherman  of  the 
Sea  of  Gennesaret,  as  a  man  of  strong,  pas- 
sionate temper,  who  was  not  so  much  a  man 
of  the  world  as  Peter,  but  who  was  more 
inwardly  moved  by  enthusiasm  for  his  Lord 
and  quick  zeal  for  his  honor.  Jesus  called 
him  and  his  brother  James  the  "sons  of 


The  Personality  of  John        45 

thunder"  (Boanerges,  Mark  3.  17),  and  the 
best  explanation  of  this  name  is  given  in  the 
narrative  in  which  we  are  told  that  both 
wished  that  fire  should  come  down  upon 
a  city  of  the  Samaritans,  which  refused  to 
receive  Jesus  (Luke  14.  54),  by  referring 
to  the  example  of  Elias  (Luke  14.  54). 
Jesus,  however,  rebuked  them,  and  said :  "Ye 
know  not  what  manner  of  spirit  ye  are  of." 
John  alone  zealously  complains  of  the  man 
who  without  belonging  to  the  company  of 
the  disciples  can  cast  out  devils  in  the  name 
of  Jesus  (Luke  9.  49).  But  Jesus  anwered : 
"Forbid  him  not,  for  he  that  is  not  against 
you  is  for  you."  Equally  decided  is  Jesus 
when,  shortly  before  the  arrival  at  Jericho, 
the  two  brothers  ask  of  him  to  be  granted 
to  sit  one  at  his  right  hand,  and  the  other  on 
the  left  hand,  in  his  glory  (Mark  10.  37). 
He  asks  them  whether  they  were  ready  to 
suffer  and  die  with  him,  and  when  they 
cheerfully  affirm  this,  he  indeed  holds  out 
prospects  to  both  but  leaves  the  disposal  of 
places  of  honor  to  his  Father,  and  exhorts 
the  disciples  in  general  to  strive  after  the 
true  greatness  which  consists,  as  in  his  own 
case,  in  service.     But  notwithstanding  this 


46         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

unmistakable  material  ambition,  John  always 
appears  among  the  three  most  familiar  dis- 
ciples of  Jesus.  He  is  permitted  to  witness 
the  raising  of  the  daughter  of  Jairus  (Mark 
5.  37)  ;  he  sees  the  Transfiguration  on  the 
mountain  in  the  north  (9.  2)  ;  he  asks  Jesus 
concerning  the  future  of  the  temple  (13.  3)  ; 
he  accompanies  Jesus  into  the  garden  of 
Gethsemane    to    watch    there    with    Jesus 

(14.33)- 

As  in  the  case  of  Peter,  Jesus  must 
have  seen  something  in  this  Galilean  youth 
which  in  spite  of  his  faults  and  hastiness 
spoke  well  for  him.  That  which  attracted 
John  to  Jesus  he  thus  expresses  in  his  Gos- 
pel :  the  proofs  of  his  deep,  kind  knowledge 
of  the  heart  which  saw  and  understood  the 
heart  of  Christ  (John  2.  25;  6.  64;  13.  11 ; 
16.  30;  21.  17)  and  alsO'  his  miraculous 
deeds  at  which  the  multitude  wondered,  not 
only  as  heralding  a  time  of  salvation,  but 
according  to  Jesus's  instruction  (Mark  2. 
10)  as  signs  also  of  his  glory,  his  power  to 
help  body  and  soul  (John  2.  11;  4.  54;  5- 
36;  10.  25  seq. ;  14.  11).  Later,  after  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus,  he  received  also'  an 
additional  proof  of  prophecy  in  the  unbelief 


The  Personality  of  John        47 

of  the  Jews  and  the  betrayal  by  Judas.  The 
sufiferings  and  resurrection  of  Jesus  he  truly 
apprehended  as  having  deeper  significance 
and  he  expressed  this  perception  by  means  of 
the  *'it  is  written"  (2.  22;  12.  38  seq.;  13. 
18;  15.  25;  17.  12;  19.  24;  28.  36  seq.; 
20.  9).  The  habit  of  finding  a  hidden  sense 
in  Old  Testament  texts,  also  influenced  his 
understanding  of  the  words  of  Jesus  (2.  21  ; 
7.  39;  12.  33;  21.  19),  so  that  he  speaks  of 
these  also  as  a  "fulfillment"  (18.  9,  32). 

In  this  sense  we  find  John  in  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles  as  a  pillar  of  the  congregation 
in  Jerusalem  (Gal.  2.  9),  and  as  the  most 
important  Jewish  missionary  next  to  Peter. 
Jewish  missionary!  With  this  the  last  word 
is  spoken  for  many,  and  every  further  de- 
velopment is  precluded.  Our  knowledge  of 
John  is  at  an  end,  unless  the  Jews  have 
perchance  killed  him.  But  was  it  necessary 
for  a  Galilean  Jewish  Christian  to  be  a 
stupid  Judaist  and  zealot  for  the  law^? 
Peter  already  gives  the  counterproof,  not 
only  as  he  is  described  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  but  also  by  Paul  (Gal.  2.  14). 
The  obstinate  men  of  the  circumcision  and 
the  adversaries  of  Paul  were  to  be  sought 


48         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

less  among  the  Galileans  than  among  the 
former  priests  (Acts  6.  y)  and  Pharisees 
(15.  5)  of  Judea.  Against  their  pretensions 
a  James  (Gal.  2.  12)  might  be  too  lenient, 
because  he  and  the  other  brothers  of  the 
Lord  had  no  intercourse  with  Jesus  during 
his  public  ministry  (John  7.  5)',  like  Peter 
and  John,  who  were  the  nearest  to  Jesus,  and 
had  in  their  recollection  of  him  and  in 
prayerful  intercourse  with  him,  a  source  of 
life-power  and  inner  continuous  develop- 
ment. This  very  idea  is  most  impressibly 
emphasized  by  the  Gospel  of  John:  "of  his 
fulness  have  all  we  received,  and  grace  for 
grace"  (John  i.  16).  Many  things  which 
Jesus  had  not  yet  told  them  on  account  of 
their  limitations  as  disciples,  became  after- 
ward clear  to  them;  not  however  from  a 
strange  source,  but  through  the  teachings  of 
his  Spirit  concerning  him  and  the  conse- 
quences of  his  work  (16.  4,  seq.),  so  that 
they  now  stood  nearer  to  him  than  before 
(16.  23  seq.). 

I  can  hardly  understand  how  one  will  re- 
ject just  here  the  idea  of  development  which 
otherwise  governs  the  entire  modern  con- 
templation of  nature  and  history  where  it 


The  Personality  of  John        49 

forces  itself,  as  it  were,  on  impartial  view. 
It  is  not  indeed  a  development  from  an  immi- 
nent vitality,  but  one  under  the  guidance  of 
the  Spirit  of  God.  To  it  belonged  above  all 
that  the  great  and  new  which  was  given  to 
the  church  of  Jesus  in  Paul,  did  not  pass  by 
John  without  leaving  a  trace.  Paul  brought 
Christianity  to  a  universal  development  out- 
wardly by  concentrating  it  inwardly  upon 
the  decisive  principal  points :  the  human  race 
in  sin;  Christ  Crucified  and  Exalted;  Life 
in  the  Holy  Ghost;  the  Church  of  Jesus 
Christ;  the  coming  of  the  Lord  in  glory. 
John  learned  from  Paul.  This  proves 
already  the  fact  that  after  a  few  decades  he 
appears  in  Asia  Minor,  having  thus  sought 
his  field  of  labor  among  the  Gentiles,  because 
Palestine  closed  its  eyes  more  and  more  to 
the  Gospel  and  hastened  the  solution  of  the 
Messianic  problems  through  the  sword  of 
the  zealots.  Here  also  originated  his  first 
work,  the  Rev  elation  of  John,  a  book  which, 
in  a  very  erroneous  manner  was  put  in  the 
keenest  contrast  to  the  other  Johannean  lit- 
erature because  one  overlooked  in  the  great 
variety  of  objects  the  still  greater  agreement 
in  fundamental  idea.     The  same  is  colored 


50         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

throughout  PauHne  in  color,  much  also  as 
the  book  betrays  Jewish  types  and  feelings 
concerning  the  coming  of  the  Lord  in  judg- 
ment. The  principal  person  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse is  Jesus  who  died  on  the  cross  (Rev. 

1.  5,  i8;  2.  8;  ii.  8)  ;  the  Lamb  slain  for 
us  (5.  6  seq.;  13.  8;  14.  i  seq.;  19.  7  seq.). 
He  speaks  to  the  seer  as  the  exalted  (i.  5, 
13  seq.,  18;  3.  21;  12.  5),  who  shall  come 
again  to  victory  over  all  his  enemies  (i.  7; 

2.  16;  3.  11;  14.  14  seq.;  19.  11  seq.;  22.  7 
seq. ) ,  after  his  church  has  gone  with  him  the 
way  to  the  cross  (i.  9;  2.  3;  6.  9;  7.  14; 
12.  11;  13.  15;  17.  6;  20.  4).  The  Church  is 
gathered  from  all  nations  (5.  9;  7.  9;  15.  4; 
21.  24;  22.  2),  and  consists  of  the  saints 
(5.  8;  13.  7;  17.  6;  22.  21)  who  believe  on 
Jesus  (2.  13;  14.  12;  17.  14).  In  reading 
the  Apocalypse  we  rightly  see  ourselves  re- 
minded of  the  "son  of  thunder,"  John;  but 
he  has  now  learned  to  understand  the  long- 
sufifering  of  Christ ;  his  entire  book  may  be 
called  the  book  of  divine  patience,  which 
again  and  again  puts  off  the  decisive  stroke. 
The  author  has  still  to  battle  with  the  Greek 
language  commonly  used  in  the  country 
where  he   had   just  now   settled.     In  his 


The  Personality  of  John        51 

images  of  the  future,  old  motives  and  new 
impressions  are  still  fermenting  promis- 
cuously; but  the  firm  point  on  which  his 
prophetical  thinking  sees  its  way,  is  Christ 
the  Victor,  and  here  on  earth  were  still 
greater  things  destined  for  him. 

John  had  learned  to  believe  with  Mark  in 
the  miracle-worker  Jesus ;  with  the  Gospel  of 
Matthew  in  the  promised  Messiah;  with 
Paul  and  Luke  in  the  Friend  of  sinners,  and 
the  Saviour  of  the  Gentiles.  Now  it  is  a 
known  fact,  that  in  manhood,  when  the  tasks 
of  life  expand  and  deepen,  reflection  also  is 
all  the  more  turned  to  that  which  properly 
gave  our  life  its  direction  and  its  content. 
Many  things  which  in  younger  years  were 
considered  as  decisive  and  valuable,  do  not 
stand  the  test  and  are  dropped.  The  more 
serious  the  question  arises  as  to  the  inmost 
cause  of  our  personal  state  of  life,  and  es- 
pecially of  our  Christianity.  John  survived 
all  other  apostles;  he  was  still  laboring  in 
Asia  Minor  after  Paul  and  Peter  had  long 
since  suffered  martyrdom.  The  Roman  em- 
pire under  a  new  dynasty  recovered  from 
the  civil  wars ;  the  Jewish  people  were 
crushed  by  the  destruction  of  their  temple; 


52         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

in  the  church  one  after  the  other  had  died 
whom  John  had  known ;  but  the  Lord  came 
not  from  heaven;  he  seemed  to  have  for- 
gotten his  disciples  and  his  church.  No  won- 
der that  the  eyes  of  the  aging  apostle  turned 
with  redoubled  energy  to  that  which  no 
changes  and  disappointments  of  the  present 
could  take  from  him,  the  biographical  por- 
trait of  Jesus,  through  whom  he  had  once 
experienced  the  great  change  of  a  new  life. 
What  was  the  decisive  blessing  in  Jesus? 
Behind  all  that  we  have  heretofore  men- 
tioned, something  higher  flashed  up,  the 
secret  of  the  person  of  Jesus,  which  appeared 
to  us  so  clearly  from  the  synoptic  accounts 
— his  unique  relation  to  God — that  he  was 
not  only  a  prophet,  inspired,  sent  from  God, 
a  Messiah  in  the  Jewish  sense,  but  also  the 
Son  of  God,  who  stood  in  the  deepest,  per- 
sonal life-communion  with  God  (John  i.  52; 
14.  11);  so  that  open  eyes  could  see  the 
glory  of  God  in  all  his  actions  ( i.  14 ;  2.  11). 
In  like  manner  was  his  unique  relation  to 
men.  They  saw  in  him  not  only  a  teacher 
and  helper,  but  a  new  life,  the  life  from  God 
(5.  24  seq. ;  6.  33  seq. ;  10.  10;  17.  2).  And 
this  was  perceived  not  merely  as  a  matter  of 


The  Personality  of  John         53 

fleeting  sensation  or  artificial  excitement,  but 
as  truth,  as  highest  reaHty  (i.  14;  4.  23; 
8.  32;  18.  37),  which  became  their  own 
through  knowledge,  not  theoretical  infor- 
mation, but  practical  experience  (6.  69; 
7.  17;  8.  2^2;  10.  14;  17.  3).  True,  that 
Jesus  lived  in  the  memory  of  John  as  a  man 
(4.  29;  7.  46;  8.  40;  19.  5),  as  one  who  in 
his  entire  work  was  dependent  on  God  (5. 
19,  30;  8.  28),  and  lived  in  obedience  to 
God  (4.  34;  6.  38;  8.  29);  as  man,  who 
when  wearied  sat  on  the  well  of  Jacob  (4. 
6),  wept  at  the  grave  of  Lazarus  (11.  35), 
and  before  his  suffering  experienced  deep 
inward  commotions  (12.  zy,  13.  21).  But 
more  important  than  these  traits  which  ir- 
revocably belonged  to  the  past,  were  to  him 
the  experiences  with  Jesus  which  now  also 
renew^ed  themselves  in  his  communion  with 
the  exalted  Christ,  and  through  him  with 
God  (14.  20,  23;  15.  4.  seq. ;  17.  23);  the 
abiding  sense  of  God  in  Jesus,  which  re- 
vealed itself  ever  more  clearly  to  the  reflec- 
tion of  the  disciple  at  the  bottom  of  the  self- 
consciousness  of  Jesus.  As  many  a  word  of 
parental  love  comes  to  our  memory  again  in 
the  stress  of  life  after  the  parents  have  long 


54         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

since  passed  away,  their  words,  however,  are 
fulfilled  in  our  experience;  thus  John,  under 
the  struggles  and  sufferings  of  his  apostolic 
office  among  the  Gentiles,  recalled  many 
sayings  of  Jesus  which  he  heard  from  his 
lips  as  a  young  beginner,  but  which  at  that 
time  he  but  lightly  esteemed  because  he  still 
labored  under  the  confused  expectations  of 
the  circle  of  the  disciples.  Among  these  es- 
pecially were  the  statements  of  Jesus  con- 
cerning himself,  which  had  been  wrung 
from  him  through  the  opposition  and  accu- 
sations of  his  adversaries,  particularly  in 
Jerusalem,  the  principal  seat  of  antagonism 
to  him;  statements  concerning  his  life  with 
God  (lo.  30,  38;  14.  10  seq.,  20;  16.  32; 
17.  21),  concerning  his  life's  purpose  with 
God  (3.  13;  6.  62;  7.  33;  8.  21)  and  his 
mysterious  descent  from  God  (6.  62;  8.  23), 
which  is  not  from  the  stream  of  time,  but 
from  God's  eternity  (8.  58;  17.  5,  24). 
John  states  expressly  that  many  words  of 
Jesus  again  occurred  to  him  and  to  the 
other  disciples  in  general  only  after  his 
resurrection,  and  which  had  now  become 
intelligible  (2.  22;  12.  16;  comp.  13.  7). 
Have  we  a  right  to  explain  this  as  mere 


The  Personality  of  John        55 

literary  fiction?  On  the  contrary,  this  was 
the  joy  of  his  old  age,  that  the  inner  and 
outer  experiences  of  his  long  Christian  life 
came  to  a  harmonious  whole  with  the  im- 
pressions of  his  choleric  youth ;  that  he  could 
bear  witness  to  the  Church,  that  the  Christ 
with  whom  Paul  conquered  the  world  is  no 
syncretistic  fancy  picture,  but  the  historical 
Jesus,  whose  earthly  life  already  breathed 
the  atmosphere  of  eternity. 


THE  ORIGINALITY  OF  THE  GOSPEL 
OF  JOHN 

The  fourth  Gospel  proceeded  from  the 
holy  joy  which  prompts  its  author  to  leave 
this  treasure  of  experiences  and  recollections 
to  the  Church.  We  must  not  ascribe  it  to 
some  "great  unknown/'  but  we  can  unhesi- 
tatingly attribute  it  to  John.  With  this  joy 
in  his  face  Raphael  represented  him  writing 
in  the  Disputa,  and  we  must  not  allow  this 
gladness  to  be  distorted  into  the  ironical 
smile  of  a  forger.  It  became  indeed  a  won- 
derful book.  John  meant  to  describe  a  per- 
sonality which  has  no  analogy;  the  "only 
Son  of  the  Father"  (i.  14,  18;  3.  16;  i  John 
4.  9).  He  does  not  engage  with  his  oppo- 
nents in  dialectical  discussion,  in  documen- 
tary proceedings,  but  simply  states :  "thus  it 
was,  and  thus  it  is."  He  considers  the  exhibi- 
tion satisfactory  as  proved.  But  by  no  means 
does  he  intend  to  set  forth  everything  he 
knows;  he  will  not  write  a  "life  of  Jesus," 
but  says  at  the  close  of  his  work :  "and  many 

S6 


The  Originality  of  John         57 

other  signs  truly  did  Jesus  in  the  presence 
of  his  disciples,  which  are  not  written  in  this 
book.  But  these  are  written,  that  ye  might 
believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of 
God;  and  that  believing  ye  might  have  life 
through  his  name"  (John  20.  30  seq.).  By 
this  he  designates  the  contents  of  the  book 
as  a  selection  of  "signs,"  that  is,  of  deeds 
and  accompanying  discourses  of  Jesus, 
which  are  to  give  the  reader  an  insight  into 
that  which  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is.  He  is  the 
Messiah,  as  the  primitive  church  already 
confessed,  but  not  in  the  natural  and  of- 
ficially circumscribed  sense  which  many 
Jewish  Christians  associated  with  the  word 
Messiah.  His  calling  rests  entirely  upon 
his  person;  he  is  the  Son  of  God,  through 
whom  the  Father  has  spoken  as  through 
none  else.  To  believe  in  him  constitutes  the 
innermost  nature  of  the  Christian  life.  Who- 
ever believes  on  him,  receives  in  his  name 
through  the  effects  which  proceed  from  con- 
nection w^ith  his  person  the  true  life;  and 
thereby  the  practical  proof,  that  in  him  we 
have  God.  This  literary  intention  is  carried 
out  with  surprising  energy  and  consequence 
through  the  whole  Gospel.     This  book  is 


58         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

indeed  not  written  by  the  "flagging  hand  of 
an  old  man" ;  for  not  every  man  of  seventy 
or  eighty  years  is  already  a  decrepit  old  man. 
We  knew  one  of  ninety  years,  who  had  not 
had  time  to  be  weary,  and  nothing  compels 
us  to  go  down  to  the  last  years  of  the  first 
century.  John  omitted  many  things  from 
the  life  of  Jesus  because  they  were  already 
sufficiently  known  to  his  readers,  and  in 
their  stead  he  narrated  other  events  which, 
for  reasons  unknown,  had  not  been  received 
into  the  synoptic  tradition  influenced  by  the 
Peter-narratives  of  Mark.  But  he  selected 
only  such  incidents  which  to  him  seemed  to 
throw  an  important  light  upon  the  person 
of  Jesus,  and  which  were  the  cause  of  the 
remarkable  statements  of  Jesus  concerning 
himself.  Hence  the  origin  of  that  which 
has  been  called  the  monotony  of  the  Gospel 
of  John. 

The  theme  is  always  the  same :  Jesus  him- 
self, whether  John  the  Baptist,  or  Nico- 
demus,  or  Caiaphas,  or  Pilate  speak,  they  all 
speak  of  Jesus.  That  John  was  a  preacher  of 
repentance,  Caiaphas  a  high  priest,  Pilate  a 
procurator,  is  for  the  author  a  secondary 
consideration.     To  some  of  our  contempo- 


The  Originality  of  John         59 

raries  who  bring  their  art-motives  from 
Japan,  their  rehgion  from  India,  and  their 
ethics  from  elsewhere,  this  may  seem  intol- 
erably one-sided;  but  nervous  versatility  has 
no  right  to  blame  a  book  which  has  produced 
such  great  things  by  its  very  sound 
uniformity. 

Some  striking  liberties  of  the  author  are 
indeed  evident.  The  relation  of  Jesus  to  his 
people  is  wholly  described  in  the  light  of  past 
history  through  wdiich  it  became  clear  that 
upon  the  whole  Israel  had  refused  the  Gospel. 
Christianity,  however,  as  a  new  religion,  en- 
tered upon  its  way  through  the  world  free 
from  the  Mosaic  law.  That  Jesus  himself 
lived  under  the  law  we  learn  indirectly  from 
the  fact  of  his  journeys  to  the  legal  feasts, 
for  the  rest  of  it  is  mainly  the  law  of  Moses 
(John  7.  19,  23;  comp.  i.  17),  the  law  of 
the  Jews  (7.  51;  8.  17;  10.  34;  15.  25), 
which  like  the  rest  of  the  Old  Testament, 
contains  prophecies  concerning  him  (5.  39, 
46  seq.).  Among  the  countrymen  of  Jesus 
a  distinction  is  indeed  made  between  the 
"people,"  which  gladly  listened  to  Jesus, 
and  the  high  priests  and  Pharisees  w^ho  op- 
pose him  but  the  collective  name  "Jews,"  is 


6o  The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

with  preference  applied  to  these  opponents 
of  Jesus.  The  time  of  worshiping  in  Jerusa- 
lem is  past  (4.  21)  ;  Jesus  Hves  not  only  for 
Israel  but  for  the  future  "children  of  God'* 
out  of  all  nations,  who  are  to  be  gathered  in 
through  him  (10.  16;  11.  52).  The  miracles 
of  Jesus,  which  for  Jewish  minds  played  such 
an  important  part  (Mark  8.  11 ;  John  6.  30; 
I  Cor.  I.  22),  areas  outward  events  little  re- 
garded. One  can  experience  them  and  yet 
inwardly  be  a  stranger  to  Jesus  (John  i.  51 ; 
2.  23  seq. ;  4.  48 ;  12.  37).  On  him  to  whom 
they  became  signs  of  Christ's  indwelling 
power  they  had  accomplished  their  purpose. 
In  like  manner  the  eschatology  which,  in  the 
synoptists,  especially  in  the  great  discourse 
on  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  has  such  a 
strong  Jewish  coloring,  is  indeed  set  aside 
by  John  (14.  3;  5-  28;  12.  48;  5.  29),  but 
words  are  put  in  the  foreground  in  which 
the  future  blessings  of  salvation  are  attested 
as  being  already  present  in  Jesus  (14.  18; 
II.  25  ;  3.  18;  14.  6).  As  to  the  past  as  well 
as  to  the  future,  the  meditating  and  brood- 
ing memories  of  the  evangelist  rise  beyond 
the  bounds  of  time,  to  abide  by  the  everlast- 
ing in  Christ. 


The  Originality  of  John         6i 

But  not  only  is  the  Jewish  in  the  life  of 
Jesus  affected  by  this  reduction  and  concen- 
tration upon  the  one  thing  needful,  nay,  the 
eye  of  John  is  so  dazzled  by  the  bright  splen- 
dor of  the  personal  life  of  Jesus,  that  aside 
from  Jesus  he  can  see  only  darkness,  the  dis- 
tance only  from  him  in  the  human  race.  He 
knows  the  relative  differences  in  the  lives  of 
men  and  expresses  them  with  psychological 
fineness  in  the  various  personalities  of  his 
narrative — in  Nathaniel,  Peter  and  Thomas, 
in  Nicodemus,  the  Samaritan  woman  and 
Bartimaeus,  in  Judas,  Caiaphas  and  Pilate. 
But  compared  with  Jesus  this  whole  hu- 
manity is  nothing  but  the  world.  Jesus  is 
wholly  and  clearly  on  the  side  of  God;  the 
world  is  given  to  sin,  to  judgment  and  death, 
and  would  perish  had  not  God  out  of  love 
sent  to  his  Son  as  the  world's  Redeemer  (i. 
29 ;  3.  16  seq. ;  4.  42 ;  12.  47).  Even  honest, 
truth-seeking  men  like  Nathaniel  (i.  48; 
3.  21 ;  18.  37)  make  no  exception;  their  love 
of  truth  shows  itself  in  this  that  they  suffer 
themselves  to  be  drawn  by  God  to  Jesus 
(6.  44  seq. ;  17.  6),  they  learn  through  him 
the  sinfulness  of  their  hearts  (i.  49;  4. 
18;  5.  14;  6.  70),  and  through  him  begin  a 


62         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

new  life  (i.  43;  3.  3).  Now  he  keeps  them 
(10.  28;  17.  12)  as  his  chosen  ones  (6.  70; 
13.  18;  15.  16),  and  prays  for  them  (14. 
16;  17.  19)  ;  he  dies  for  them  (10.  15  seq. ; 
15'  13)  >  ^^^  overcomes  the  world  for  them 
(16.  33),  so  that  the  hatred  of  the  world  in 
which  they  live,  cannot  harm  them  (15.  18 
seq.;  17.  11).  Whoever  believes  not  in 
Jesus  is  subject  to  divine  wrath  and  is  ex- 
cluded from  eternal  life  (3.  36).  This  keen 
contrast  between  the  work  of  God  in  Christ 
and  the  world  has  been  called  "dualism"; 
but  this  is  an  altogether  misleading  expres- 
sion, because  dualism  in  philosophical  usage 
designates  the  opposition  of  spirit  and  mat- 
ter, whereas  John  conceives  the  creation  as 
not  separated  entirely  from  God;  he  makes 
Jesus  really  live  in  the  flesh  (i.  14;  6.  51 
seq.).  As  no  supposed  monism  has  yet  suc- 
ceeded in  deriving  organic  life  from  inor- 
ganic existence,  mental  life  from  animal  in- 
stinct, so  John  emphasizes  with  all  energy 
that  the  life  that  he  and  his  fellow-Christians 
had  received  was  a  gift  which  only  Jesus 
could  give,  and  which  puts  in  the  shade  every 
other  content  of  human  life.  But  this  lifei 
entered  our  real  world  through  Jesus  and  it 


The  Originality  of  John         63 

produces   not   only   desire   for   heaven   but 
power  over  sin. 

The  same  general  latitude  and  liberty  is 
shown  by  John  also  in  the  manner  in  which 
he  treats  his  matter  as  an  author.  He  some- 
times commences  a  narrative,  but  follows  it 
up  only  so  far  until  the  momentous  words  of 
Jesus  are  mentioned ;  he  then  breaks  off  and 
the  reader  can  draw  his  own  conclusions. 
Thus,  at  the  cleansing  of  the  temple  (2.  20), 
in  the  colloquy  w^ith  Nicodemus  (3.  21),  at 
the  raising  of  Lazarus  (11.  44),  in  the  nar- 
rative of  the  Greeks  who  wished  to  see 
Jesus  (12.  26).  At  other  times  in  the  midst 
of  an  incident  he  refers  to  foiTner  events 
which  belong  to  another  connection.  At  the 
feast  of  tabernacles  he  is  reminded  of  the 
healing  of  the  sick  at  Bethesda  which  took 
place  a  year  before  (7.  21 ;  5.  8).  The  sub- 
ject of  the  Good  Shepherd  he  takes  up  again 
after  many  months  on  the  feast  of  the  dedi- 
cation (10.  26,  15).  In  the  farewell  ad- 
dresses Jesus  admonishes  the  disciples  at  the 
end  of  chapter  14  to  go  to  Gethsemane  (14. 
31),  yet  tw^o  other  chapters  follow  and  the 
high-priestly  prayer.  The  narratives  are 
given  in  an  order  which  visibly  answers  the 


64         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

desire  to  show  the  revelation  of  God  in 
Christ,  and  its  different  reception  by  men  in 
some  typical  examples.  In  like  manner  the 
sayings  of  Jesus  which  are  related  as  to 
content  are  put  together  in  large  discourses 
as  was  done  already  by  the  first  evangelist, 
and  before  him  by  the  author  of  the  address- 
narratives.  The  farewell  addresses,  so  to 
speak,  need  not  to  have  been  successively  de- 
livered in  one  hour,  as  we  now  read  them; 
but  John  united  at  this  point  what  on  the 
whole  he  remembered  of  the  words  of  Jesus 
spoken  in  the  midst  of  his  disciples  before 
his  crucifixion.  Between,  the  words  of  Jesus 
he  occasionally  puts  some  explanatory  re- 
marks (2.  21  seq. ;  6.  6,  64;  7.  39;  8.  2y;  11. 
13,  51;  12.  33,  41;  13.  11;  18.  9,  32),  in 
which  he  shows  his  predilection  for  mysteri- 
ous references  to  future  events.  But  his 
greatest  boldness  is  evinced  where  he  makes 
Jesus  as  well  as  John  the  Baptist,  and  other 
persons  speak  Johannean,  that  is,  in  the  lan- 
guage of  the  many  axioms  described  hereto- 
fore, in  which  a  few  main  thoughts  are 
varied  in  different  ways  through  effectual 
contrasts  between  Christ  and  what  Christ  is 
not.    In  the  face  of  all  this  emphasis,  can  the 


The  Originality  of  John         65 

question  still  be  of  the  credibility  of  the 
Gospel  ?  It  would  seem  not.  For  him  who 
rejects  the  idea  of  verbal  inspiration  and 
demands  stenography,  everything  should  not 
become  uncertain. 

But  we  shall  do  w^ell  to  consider  the  fol- 
lowing facts :  Each  author  of  antiquity  was 
in  the  habit  of  forming  without  the  least 
scruple  the  speeches  of  his  heroes  as  regards 
style,  because  one  proceeded  from  the  cor- 
rect consideration  that  the  thoughts,  the  con- 
tents of  that  which  had  been  spoken  was  the 
effectual  thing,  and  not  the  accidental  form 
of  the  text.  Once  only  does  John  quote  a 
solemn  address  of  Jesus  (12.  44  seq. ) ,  after 
he  had  narrated  that  Jesus  had  departed 
from  the  persistently  unbelieving  people  in 
Jerusalem  (12.  36).  A  popular  address 
("he  cried  and  said")  without  hearers?  No, 
but  an  address  in  which,  at  the  close  of  the 
public  ministry  of  Jesus,  his  testimony  was 
again  but  slightly  comprehended  by  the 
evangelist.  Jesus  and  his  disciples  were  far 
removed  from  fixing  sacred  formulas  and 
texts.  The  best  known  words  of  Jesus,  even 
the  Lord's  Prayer  and  the  words  at  the 
Lord's  Supper,  are  extant  in  different  texts. 


66  The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

The  church  of  Jesus  was  not  to  swear  to 
words  and  fight  over  words,  but  to  rejoice 
in  the  thing,  present  salvation  in  Christ. 
Like  none  else  John  shows  a  sovereign  in- 
difference toward  the  naked  text.  When  he 
refers  back  to  what  has  been  said  before, 
he  generally  quotes  it  deviating  from  the 
former  wording  (3.  3  and  ']\'j.  34  and  13. 
33;  8.  21  and  24;  6.  44  and  65;  11.  26  and 
40;  17.  12  and  18.  9).  On  the  other  hand, 
he  quotes  words  which,  according  to  the 
text,  exclude  themselves,  but  in  truth  only 
illustrate  the  same  matter  from  two  different 
sides  (3.  17  and  9.  39;  5.  31  and  8.  14; 
comp.  I  John  i.  10  and  3.  9;  2.  7  and  8; 
John  3.  32  and  33).  This  license  over 
against  the  letter  is  connected  with  the  inner- 
most nature  of  the  spiritual  state  of  the  dis^ 
ciple.  John  knows  indeed  that  one  becomes 
a  disciple  when  one  hears  and  receives  the 
words  of  Jesus  (5.  24;  12.  48),  keeps  and 
preserves  them  (8.  51;  15.  7).  He  also 
knows  that  the  Holy  Spirit  who  rules  in  the 
church  since  the  exaltation  of  Jesus  to  the 
Father  (7.  39;  20.  22),  brings  nothing  new 
beyond  Jesus,  but  reminds  the  disciples  of 
the  words  of  Jesus ;  testifies  to  them  of  Jesus 


The  Originality  of  John         67 

and  glorifies  Jesus  in  them  (14.  26;  15.  26; 
16.  14).  Therefore  in  an  increasing  meas- 
ure John  formed  his  own  mode  of  expression 
on  the  very  self-testimonies  of  Jesus  which 
as  time  passed  became  more  precious  and 
valuable.  Whereas  the  Apocalypse  very 
much  reminds  us  of  the  Old  Testament  and 
Jewish  Apocalypses,  John's  language  in  his 
Gospel  has  wholly  assumed  the  solemnly 
simple  strain,  emphasizing  great  contrasts 
and  sayings  which  we  also  find  among  the 
synoptists  where  Jesus  speaks  of  himself 
(Matt.  II.  25  seq. ;  10.  32  seq. ;  12.  30  seq. ; 
13.  II  seq.;  18.  18  seq.;  25.  31  seq.;  28.  18 
seq. ;  Luke  12.  49  seq. ;  13.  32  seq.).  To  this 
John  added  nothing  foreign  to  Jesus,  but  as 
with  regard  to  the  contents,  he  only  let  the 
real  keynote  of  the  life  of  Jesus  sound 
through  everything. 

It  is  remarkable  that  in  the  Epistles  of 
John  which  belong  to  the  same  time,  the 
language  is  the  same,  the  thoughts,  however, 
less  in  depth  and  originality  than  the  dis- 
courses of  Jesus,  are  more  adapted  to  the 
ordinary  Christian  consciousness  and  thus 
answered  the  practical  purpose  of  the 
Epistles,  which  are  an  echo  of  the  Gospel 


68  The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

and  not  its  source.  But  in  these  very 
Epistles  John  shows  himself  free  from  all 
anxious  adherence  to  given  expressions.  For 
instance,  in  the  Gospel,  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
called  the  Comforter  (14.  16,  26;  15.  26; 
16.  7)  but  Jesus  is  thus  named  in  the  First 
Epistle  (2.  i),  and  the  Spirit  is  called 
Unction  (2.  20,  2^^.  To  the  work  of  Christ 
is  applied  the  thought  of  "propitiation," 
which  is  wanting  in  the  Gospel  (2.  2 ;  4.  10). 
The  Evangelist  John  is  filled  with  the  thought 
that  the  words  of  Jesus  are  not  saving  for- 
mulas, whose  most  frequent  repetition  evi- 
dences connection  with  God,  but  that  they 
are  Spirit  and  Life  (John  6.  63),  words  in 
which  are  expressed  thoughts  of  God, 
truths  of  God  w^hich  have  an  everlasting 
meaning  and  which  apply  to  the  most  dif- 
ferent times  and  relations ;  words  of  eternal 
life  through  which  the  Spirit  of  Truth  guides 
the  disciples  into  all  truth  (6.  68;  16.  13). 
Jesus  himself  lives  in  the  disciples  who  be- 
lieve on  him  (6.  56;  14.  20;  15.  4  seq. ;  17. 
23  seq.)  ;  and  hence  the  disciple  remains  not 
always  weak  and  helpless,  but  the  water 
which  Jesus  gives  him,  becomes  in  him  a 
well  of  water  (4.  14;  7.  38).    He  can  say: 


The  Originality  of  John         69 

"We  have  the  mind  of  Christ"  (i  Cor.  2. 
16)  ;  he  is  the  friend  of  Jesus,  not  merely  his 
servant  (John  15.  14  seq.).  He  asks  Jesus 
no  more  questions  of  doubt  and  lacking  of 
understanding  (16.  23)  nor  does  he  need 
any  more  metaphorical  explanations  of  the 
thoughts  of  Jesus  (16.  25).  In  Spirit-com- 
munion with  Jesus,  the  disciple  is  immedi- 
ately certain  of  the  love  of  God  ( 16.  26  seq.). 
Imagining  that  the  Gospel  of  John  was  writ- 
ten by  a  man  who  had  reached  the  height  of 
maturity  in  discipleship,  we  will  not  expect 
that  for  the  space  of  half  a  century  he  pre- 
served to  us  every  expression  of  Jesus  in  an 
authentic  text;  that  his  personal  order  or 
mode  of  life  and  mode  of  expression  re- 
mained without  any  influence  on  this  book, 
nevertheless  we  cannot  but  conceive  that 
only  a  disciple  and  eye-witness  could  write 
so  freely  and  deeply ;  and  that  we  have  here 
before  us  the  portraiture  of  the  historical 
Jesus. 


VI 

THE  CONTENTS  OF  THE  GOSPEL 
OF  JOHN 

Turning  from  the  evangelist  to  his  Gos- 
pel, its  very  introduction,  the  prologue  (i. 
1-18),  gives  us  an  imposing  proof  of  the 
intellectual  liberty  and  largeness  of  the  view 
which  John  had  obtained  in  his  life  as  a  dis- 
ciple, rich  in  the  experiences  of  the  earlier 
evangelists.  Mark  commenced  his  account 
with  John  the  Baptist  (Mark  i.  i  seq.)  ; 
Matthew  prefaced  his  by  a  history  of  the 
birth  and  infancy  and  traced  the  origin  of 
Jesus  back  to  Abraham  (Matt.  i.  i  seq.). 
Luke  brought  a  still  more  detailed  fore-his- 
tory and  went  back  even  to  Adam  (Luke 
3.  38).  For  John  this  was  insufficient. 
True,  that  he  also  commences  his  historical 
notices  with  John  the  Baptist  (i.  6,  15,  19), 
through  whom  he  had  himself  come  to 
Jesus  (i.  35  seq.)  ;  true,  that  he  also  knew 
that  Jesus  was  born  of  a  woman  (2.  i  seq. ; 
6.  42;  18.  37;  19.  25  seq.),  and  was  known 

among  the  Jews  as  the  son  of  Joseph  of 

70 


Contents  of  Gospel  of  John      71 

Nazareth  (i.  46;  6.  42).  But  he  must  go 
further  back  if  he  is  to  speak  of  Jesus;  he 
must  reach  back  into  the  depths  of  God, 
which  he  does  with  those  notable  introduc- 
tory words :  "In  the  beginning  was  the  word 
(the  Logos),  and  the  Word  was  with  God, 
and  the  Word  was  God.  The  same  was  in 
the  beginning  with  God.  All  things  were 
made  by  Him;  and  without  Him  was  not 
anything  made  that  was  made.  In  him  was 
life,  and  the  life  was  the  light  of  men." 
These  words  produced  much  veneration  for 
the  Gospel  of  John  from  the  philosophically 
educated  classes  of  all  centuries.  In  modern 
theology,  however,  they  have  led  to  the 
opinion  that  the  credibility  of  John  can 
already  be  done  away  with  by  the  catch- 
word "Logos-evangelist"  and  "Logos- 
Christ";  because  from  the  beginning  the 
author  takes  the  Logos-idea  as  his  basis,  and 
his  entire  portrait  of  Jesus  is  ruled  by  it. 
The  Logos-idea,  however,  it  is  asserted,  he 
borrowed  from  Philo  who  blended  the  teach- 
ings of  Heraclitus  and  the  Stoics  concerning 
the  Logos,  as  the  forming  law  of  nature, 
with  the  Platonic  ideology,  and  the  later 
Jewish  statements  about  Wisdom  as  media- 


"^2  The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

trix  of  creation,  and  described  the  Logos  as 
the  middle  principle  between  God  and  the 
material  world.  In  this  assertion  a  correct 
observation  is  incorrectly  turned  against  the 
Gospel.  It  is  quite  possible  that  John  in  his 
manifold  intercourse  with  Hellenists  and 
Greeks,  became  acquainted  with  their  Logos- 
idea  as  a  pet  phrase  of  the  educated  at  the 
time,  which  seemed  to  him  suitable  to  con- 
vey to  them  an  idea  of  the  divine  which  ap- 
peared in  Jesus;  the  selection  of  the  term 
may  have  been  influenced  by  this  considera- 
tion. But  still  more  certain  is  it  that  John 
did  not  write  for  a  conventicle  of  the  edu- 
cated, but  for  the  Christian  church,  to 
strengthen  it  in  its  belief  in  Jesus  {22,  31). 
Hence,  he  had  to  use  expressions  which  con- 
veyed an  idea  to  those  without  philosophic 
training;  terms  which  would  be  comprehen- 
sible to  every  thoughtful  member  of  the  con- 
gregation. Such  was  the  case  when,  with 
the  term  "Logos,"  John  combined  not  the 
philosophical  meaning,  "rational  system  of 
the  world,''  but  the  equally  acceptable  mean- 
ing "word,"  which  would  remind  the  first 
readers  of  the  speaking  of  God  in  the  Old 
Testament ;  above  all  of  the  history  of  crea- 


Contents  of  Gospel  of  John      73 

tion  which  also  commences  with  the  words: 
*'In  the  beginning,"  and  then  passes  over  to 
the  creative  speaking  of  God  bringeth  forth 
hght  and  hfe  (Gen.  i.  i  seq.).  It  would 
also  remind  them  of  many  other  Old  Testa- 
ment passages  in  which  the  word  of  God 
creates  (Ps.  33.  6  seq.),  runs  (Ps.  147.  15), 
goes  forth  and  returns  (Isa.  55.  11),  destroys 
(Jer.  2^.  29)  and  heals  (Ps.  107,  20).  John 
starts  from  a  biblical  basis  with  which  his 
readers  were  familiar,  and  from  this  leads 
them  to  the  deepest  understanding  of  Jesus. 
The  Word  expresses  the  thought  and  wish 
of  man ;  it  reveals  what  is  in  him.  The  God 
of  the  Old  Testament  was  a  speaking  God, 
a  God  of  revelation,  of  self-communication, 
a  God  of  the  Word.  John  then  proceeds 
from  this  well-known  thought,  his  life-long 
meditation  and  search,  to  find  the  true  ex- 
pression for  the  mystery  of  the  person  of 
Jesus,  and  here  his  thought  has  come  to  a 
rest.  In  each  of  his  great  works  he  speaks 
of  Jesus  as  Logos  (Rev.  19.  13;  John  i.  i, 
14;  I  John  I.  i),  but  every  time  in  respect- 
ful, brief  reference  as  becomes  the  mystery. 
In  the  further  course  of  the  Gospel  Jesus 
nowhere    calls    himself    the    "Word,"    but 


74         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

speaks  of  the  word  of  God  in  the  usual,  ob- 
jective sense  (John  5.  38;  8.  55;  10.  35;  17. 
6  seq.),  so  accurately  does  John  distinguish 
between  his  recollection  and  his  profound 
attempt  to  explain  the  power  of  Jesus.  The 
Church  likewise  rightly  did  not  receive  the 
Logos-thought  into  her  oldest  confession, 
but  made  greater  use  of  it  in  her  theology.^ 
In  the  beginning,  says  John,  before  there 
was  yet  a  world,  was  the  Word.  God  has 
never  been  an  inactive  or  dreaming  God, 
rather  he  is  a  living,  personal  God,  conscious 
of  himself,  who  had  to  realize  his  thoughts. 
The  will,  for  such  self-manifestation,  belongs 
inseparably  to  the  being  of  God  and  is  God 
himself ;  for  God  will  give  nothing  less  than 
himself.  By  the  Word  all  things  without 
exception  were  made.  Nothing  accidental, 
nothing  abortive  came  from  the  hand  of 
God ;  "Everything  was  very  good."  In  this 
self-communication  of  God  consisted  and 
consists  the  life  of  created  things.  God  is 
not  the  negative  of  concrete  life,  but  in  each 
being  a  thought  of  God  is  realized.  In  man, 
however  (the  author  silently  follows  the 
history  of  creation),  this  divine  power  of 

1  See  Schaff,  Creeds  of  Christendom. 


Contents  of  Gospel  of  John      75 

life  becomes  a  light,  a  conscious  intellectual 
life,  which  is  disposed  to  know  the  truth ;  on 
which  account  man  is  the  crown  of  God's 
creation.  These  firm  foundations  of  a 
Christian  theism  and  optimism  form  the 
basis  of  everything  that  follows:  the  God 
of  creation  is  the  Father  of  Jesus  Christ. 

"And  the  light  shineth  in  darkness,  and 
the  darkness  comprehendeth  it  not.  The 
true  light  which  light eth  every  man  that 
Cometh  into  the  zvorld.  He  was  in  the 
zvorld,  and  the  world  was  made  by  him,  and 
the  world  knew  him  not." 

John  does  not  expressly  mention  the  fall ; 
but  with  a  determination  which  reminds  us 
of  Paul  (Rom.  3.  23),  he  comprises  the 
time  of  Judaism  and  that  of  heathenism 
under  judgment.  The  light  of  divine  reve- 
lation (here  nature  and  conscience,  there 
the  law)  existed,  but  it  shined  into  humanity 
darkened  by  sin,  estranged  from  God.  Thus 
it  continued  until  John  the  Baptist,  who  as 
the  herald  of  the  final  revelation  of  God, 
was  allowed  to  bear  witness  of  the  Light 
(John  I.  6-8).  Now  commence  the  per- 
sonal recollections  of  the  author,  and  he 
quickly  transfers  his  readers  to  that  time  of 


"j^  The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

great  expectation  unforgotten  by  him,  when 
the  Baptist  appeared  and  pointed  at  a  greater 
one  who  should  come  after  him.  At  that 
time  the  self -revelation  of  God  to  the  human 
race  which  to  a  degree  had  already  aided  all 
higher  life  of  men,  was  at  its  highest  mani- 
festation. It  was  "to  come  into  the  world.'* 
Its  presence  in  the  world,  which  owed  to  it 
its  existence,  had  not  sufficed;  the  world 
knew  it  not.  Now  came  the  highest  which 
would  never  have  entered  the  mind  of  any 
man:  the  Word  of  God  appeared  in  the 
world  through  One,  who,  not  only  had  God's 
word  for  a  certain  generation  like  the  proph- 
ets (Jer.  23.  28),  but  was  God's  word  for 
the  entire  human  race ;  God's  bodily,  perfect 
manifestation,  God's  word  in  person.  And 
how  was  this  personal  manifestation  of  God 
in  him  received  by  men  ? 

^'He  came  unto  his  own  and  his  own  re- 
ceived him  not.  But  as  many  as  received 
him,  to  them  gave  he  power  to  become  the 
sons  of  God,  even  to  them  that  believe  on  his 
name;  which  were  born,  not  of  blood,  nor 
of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of 
man,  but  of  God.  And  the  Word  zvas  made 
■flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us,  and  we  beheld  his 


Contents  of  Gospel  of  John      'jy 

glory,  the  glory  as  of  the  only  begotten  of 
the  Father,  full  of  grace  and  truth.'' 

Here  already  resounds  the  heavy-hearted 
accent  which  afterward  runs  through  the 
Gospel  (3.  19,  32;  8.  43;  12.  37)  ;  the  shin- 
ing manifestation  of  the  heart  and  will  of 
God  through  Him  who  was  the  Word  him- 
self was  not  received,  as  one  would  have 
expected.  He  came  into  the  world,  which 
was  his  own  as  true  as  it  was  God's  world ; 
but  the  men,  to  whom  he  came,  proved  in- 
different, as  before  the  darkness  had  kept 
off  the  light.  The  more  precious  was  his 
gift  to  those  who  received  him  in  faith. 
These  he  made  sons  of  God  by  the  mysteri- 
ous experience  of  spiritual  birth  from  God. 
In  their  midst  he  dwelt  as  the  Word,  which 
Avas  made  flesh ;  as  the  man  whose  whole  life 
was  a  manifestation  of  God  and  the  gift  of 
God.  More  luminous  than  Israel  had  once 
seen  the  **Shekinah,"  in  the  tabernacle,  the 
glory  of  the  Lord,  believers  saw  the  glory  of 
the  only  Son  in  divine  grace  and  truth  which 
went  forth  from  Jesus ;  as  sons  of  God  they 
perceived  in  him  the  Son  of  God,  whom  the 
Father  had  sent  into  the  world  (5.  36 ;  7.  28 ; 
.8.  32).    John  does  not  obtain  the  certainty 


78         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

of  this  divine  origin  of  Jesus  from  the 
Logos-tliought,  but,  Hke  Paul  (Rom.  9.  5; 
I  Cor.  8.  6;  10.  4;  15.  47;  2  Cor.  8.  9;  Phil. 
2.  6;  Col.  I.  5  seq.),  and  the  author  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (Heb.  i.  2  seq.) 
from  the  total  impression  of  the  life  of  Jesus 
which  was  confirmed  to  him  through  the 
recollection  of  the  words  of  Jesus  (John  3. 
11;  6.  38,  46,  62;  8.  23,  38,  42;  16.  28;  17. 
5,  8,  24).  He  who  in  his  earthly  existence 
was  the  image  of  God,  and  in  the  power  of 
God  passed  from  death  unto  glory,  cannot 
have  proceeded  like  ourselves  from  nothing. 
An  eternal,  personal  relation  to  God  must  be 
attributed  to  him,  through  which  he  already 
shared  in  the  pre-Christian  manifestation  of 
God  (8.  56  seq.;  12.  41).  Of  this  glory  of 
Jesus,  John  the  Baptist  already  presaged 
something  and  humbly  bowed  before  it  (i. 
15).  But  greater  things  awaited  the  dis- 
ciples of  Jesus. 

'^And  of  his  fulness  have  all  we  received, 
and  grace  for  grace.  For  the  law  was  given 
by  Moses,  but  grace  and  truth  came  by  Jesus 
Christ.  No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time; 
the  only  begotten  Son,  which  is  in  the  bosom 
of  the  Father,  he  hath  declared  him."    In  the 


Contents  of  Gospel  of  John      79 

same  weighty  conciseness  \\hich  character- 
izes the  entire  prologue,  there  is  stated  here 
that  which  has  been  the  outcome  of  the 
intercourse  of  the  disciples  with  Jesus. 

From  the  life  of  the  Son  of  God,  which 
proved  to  them  an  inexhaustible  fullness  of 
grace  and  truth,  they  could  take  grace  for 
grace  and  were  forever  rescued  from  the 
power  of  sin.  They  were  lifted  beyond  the 
law  of  Moses  under  which  they  had  thus 
far  served  God  slavishly  (15.  15).  Through 
Jesus  the  grace  of  God  became  the  object  of 
their  personal  experience,  and  the  perfect 
knowledge  of  God  which  all  former  genera- 
tions could  not  have  experienced  according 
to  the  existing  state  of  the  revelation  of 
God  now  become  realized  in  them  through 
the  Son  of  God,  who  could  speak  of  God 
like  one  of  his  bosom  friends  and 
companions. 

Thus,  in  this  wondrous  prologue,  John 
gradually  leads  his  readers  from  the  very 
beginning  of  creation  down  to  his  time,  from 
the  throne  of  heaven  to  the  earthly  existence, 
and  with  an  experienced  hand,  he  traces  the 
ground-lines  of  the  picture  which  is  after- 
ward to  shine  before  us  in  warm  colors.    He 


8o  The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

first  speaks  of  the  Word,  then  of  the  Lord 
who  had  come,  then  of  the  only-begotten 
Son  of  the  Father;  finally,  of  Jesus,  the 
Messiah  (i.  17).  With  a  firm  hand  John 
links  the  picture  of  his  Master  with  the  his- 
tory of  religion,  and  comes  to  the  result: 
God's  revelation  in  Jesus  is  his  final  word 
to  humanity ;  in  Jesus  we  have  the  true  God. 
This  is  fullness  indeed. 

We  were  compelled  to  dwell  at  length 
upon  the  prologue  because  the  erroneous  as- 
sertion has  been  inferred  from  it  that  the 
Gospel  of  John  could  not  come  from  an  eye- 
witness. The  rest  of  the  book  we  can  treat 
more  briefly,  because  its  systematic  arrange- 
ment is  striking.  The  first  section  (i.  19 — 
4.  54)  describes  how  Jesus  appeared  in 
Israel  according  to  the  announcement  of 
John  the  Baptist,  and  obtained  his  first  dis- 
ciples from  his  followers.  To  this  circle  of 
disciples  the  miraculous  wine-gift  at  the 
marriage  in  Cana  manifests  his  glory; 
whereas,  Jerusalem,  in  the  cleansing  of  the 
temple,  experiences  his  judicial  severity; 
and  there  the  first  remonstrances  against 
him  already  begin.  The  colloquy  with  Nico- 
demus  shows  Jesus  in  his  intercourse  with 


Contents  of  Gospel  of  John      8i 

the  leading-  circles  of  the  people.  The  con- 
versation with  the  Samaritan  woman  reveals 
his  affection  for  the  lowly  esteemed  people, 
and  opens  prospects  of  a  later  mission  be- 
yond Israel.  In  the  narrative  of  the  son  of 
the  nobleman,  Jesus  is  finally  presented  as 
the  miraculous  healer  of  the  sick.  Words 
and  deeds,  in  close  connection,  testify  of  him 
as  the  great  Saviour  who  goes  his  way  in 
the  power  of  God. 

The  second  section  (5.  i — 12.  50)  shows 
how  from  this  work  of  Jesus  originated  the 
tragic  conflict  between  him  and  his  people. 
The  healing  of  the  sick  at  Bethesda  gives  of- 
fence, because  it  is  done  on  the  Sabbath.  The 
Galileans  are  offended  at  Jesus,  because  after 
the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand  he  would  not 
take  the  lead  of  a  Messianic  movement,  and, 
instead  of  a  display  of  miraculous  power, 
speaks  to  them  of  the  Bread  of  Life  and 
of  the  possibility  of  a  bloody  end.  On  the 
feast  of  tabernacles  the  urgent  appeals  of 
Jesus  to  believe  on  him  meet  with  an  even 
keener  opposition  which,  in  the  discourse 
concerning  Abraham,  increases  to  outrages, 
and  Is  not  allayed  by  the  healing  of  the  man 
bom  blind.     From  the  tenth  chapter  on  the 


82  The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

transition  to  the  circle  of  the  disciples  is 
prepared.  In  the  discourse  on  the  Good 
Shepherd  Jesus  shows  what  his  followers 
have  in  him.  He  raises  Lazarus.  Before 
his  entrance  into  Jerusalem  he  is  anointed  at 
Bethany.  After  his  entrance  into  the  city 
the  Greeks  who  wish  to  see  Jesus  give  him 
an  opportunity  to  speak  of  his  death.  Jesus 
now  retires  from  the  public  eye. 

The /Mr J  section  (13.  i ;  17.  26)  describes 
what  took  place  in  closest  communion  wnth 
his  disciples.  At  the  last  meal  Jesus 
prophesies  the  betrayal  by  Judas  and  the 
denial  of  Peter.  In  the  washing  of  their 
feet,  he  shows  them  his  kind  love  and  ex- 
horts them  tO'  like  love  among  themselves. 
The  other  farewell  addresses,  interrupted  by 
questions  and  objections  of  the  disciples,  re- 
fer in  a  natural  vein  to  his  approaching 
farewell;  to  the  work  of  Jesus  thus  far, 
which  will  not  be  destroyed  but  completed 
by  his  death ;  to  the  future  condition  of  his 
disciples  in  the  world  and  the  inner  support 
which  they  shall  have  by  the  assistance  of 
the  Holy  Spirit ;  finally,  to  the  meeting  again 
with  Jesus. 

In  the  "high-priestly"  prayer  Jesus  brings 


Contents  of  Gospel  of  John      83 

before  his  Father  the  deepest  requests  of  his 
soul  for  himself,  his  disciples  and  the  future 
church.  Painful  as  were  the  controversial 
disputes  of  the  second  section,  as  comforting 
are  those  words  in  the  circle  of  the  disciples 
with  the  breath  of  peace  and  the  holy  love 
which  permeated  them,  priceless  comfort  for 
the  mourners  of  all  times. 

In  the  fourth  section  (18.  i — 20.  31 )  Jesus 
resolutely  faces  his  destiny  and  with  rapid 
strokes  the  tragedy  develops.  Jesus  is  taken 
in  Gethsemane  and  examined  before  the  high 
priest.  Peter  denies  him.  Before  Pilate  he 
acknowledges  that  he  is  a  king  and  deeply 
impresses  the  judge,  but  is  finally  scourged 
and  condemned  to  be  crucified.  Of  the  last 
hours,  the  title  on  the  cross  and  the  casting 
of  lots  for  the  garments  are  mentioned,  to- 
gether with  the  three  words  of  the  Crucified. 
The  burial  is  preceded  by  the  piercing  of 
Jesus'  side,  w^hereby  his  actual  death  was 
determined. 

The  history  of  the  passion  as  described  by 
John  is  not  devoid  of  truly  human  traits — 
like  the  thirsting  on  the  cross — but  the  im- 
pression of  the  silent  greatness,  the  majesty 
of  him  who  voluntarily  offered  his  life  is 


84         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

predominant.  On  the  Easter-day,  Peter  and 
John  find  an  empty  grave.  Mary  Magdalene 
sees  the  Risen  One,  and  in  the  evening  He 
appears  in  the  midst  of  his  disciples.  A 
week  later  Thomas  is  convinced  of  the  truth 
of  the  resurrection  and  exclaimed :  "My  Lord 
and  my  God";  which  thus  expresses  the 
author's  innermost  disposition  of  the  heart 
toward  Jesus. 

The  twenty-first  chapter,  with  the  appear- 
ance of  Jesus  at  the  Sea  of  Tiberias,  forms 
an  addition,  probably  by  the  hand  of  John 
himself,  but  with  a  final  word  by  another 
hand  (21.  24  seq.).  It  transfers  the  reader 
to  the  time  when  Peter  had  long  ago  suffered 
martyrdom,  and  the  question  was  raised  in 
the  church  as  to  the  end  of  the  aged  John ; 
that  this  last  apostle  also  died  and  that 
the  congregation  was,  nevertheless,  not 
shaken  in  its  belief  in  the  coming  of  the 
Lord.  This  is  owed  to  Paul  and  John,  the 
men  who  had  indelibly  written  into  its  soul 
that  salvation  is  now  already  present  in 
Christ,  by  celebrating  Jesus  as  the  Son  of 
God,  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  the  living 
King  and  Lord. 


CONCLUSION 

One  of  the  ablest  workers  in  the  New 
Testament  department,  Weizsiicker,  com- 
prised his  doubts  about  the  genuineness  of 
the  Gospel  of  John  in  these  words:  "That 
that  apostle,  according  to  the  Gospel,  the  be- 
loved disciple,  who  sat  beside  Jesus,  con- 
sidered and  described  everything  which  he 
once  experienced,  as  living  with  the  incar- 
nate divine  Logos  is  ...  a  mystery.  No 
power  of  faith  and  philosophy  can  be  largely 
enough  represented  to  obliterate  the  recollec- 
tion of  the  real  life  and  to  put  in  its  place 
this  admirable  picture  of  a  divine  life'' 
(Apostolisches  Zeitalter,  26.  ed.,  p.  517). 
His  inquiry  has  led  us  to  answer :  The  real 
life  of  Jesus,  even  according  to  the  Synop- 
tists,  was  so  remarkable,  so  unique,  so 
powerful,  that  in  a  disciple  who  spent  his 
whole  life  meditating  on  the  mystery  of  the 
person  of  Jesus,  his  conception  of  Jesus  as 
the  incarnate,  divine  Logos  had  to  be  neces- 
sarily revealed  to  the  church  at  last,  because 
his  loving,  reverential  thought  could  never 
rest  in  any  other  explanation. 
85 


86         The  Gospel  of  St.  John 

By  so  doing  he  did  not  put  the  admirable 
picture  of  a  divine  being  in  the  place  of  the 
historical  Jesus,  but  illustrated  the  picture 
of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  the  traits  of  divine 
glory  v^hich  he  and  his  fellow  disciples  had 
witnessed  in  Jesus.  The  decision  for  or 
against  the  truth  of  his  account  will  always 
be  conditioned  by  two  super-historical  fac- 
tors: first,  whether  one  believes  in  miracles, 
for  according  to,  John,  Jesus  is  indeed  a 
miraculous  personality  who  cannot  be  com- 
pared even  with  the  greatest  men  of  the 
human  race.  He  is  the  only  one  after  whom 
we  need  not  look  for  another  because  no  reli- 
gious advance  of  the  human  race  can  ever 
lead  beyond  Him,  but  only  go  deeper  into 
that  which  he  intended.  Secondly,  one  must 
consider  what  he  has  experienced  himself 
with  Jesus  and  how  he  is  personally  related 
to  him.  He  may  take  as  his  pattern  a  very 
great  prophet,  a  religious  genius,  a  hero  of 
love  and  trust  in  God,  he  may  try  to  reduce 
the  accounts  of  all  Gospels  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment to  the  notions  of  this  time;  but  the 
cords  will  not  hold.  But  he,  who  needs  a 
Redeemer  from  sin,  a  Mediator  and  personal 
Helper,  and  has  experienced  Jesus  as  such 


Conclusion  87 

in  many  anxious  hours  of  his  life,  will  gladly 
say  with  John:  "We  understand  one 
another;  thy  Jesus  is  also  mine;  yea,  He  is 
the  Way,  the  Truth  and  the  Life;  no  man 
Cometh  unto  the  Father,  but  by  Him  !"^ 

*  For  further  study  see  Professor  Sanday's  recent  work 
on  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  Recent  Criticism,  and  The 
Fourth  Gospel:  Its  Purpose  and  Theology,  by  Ernest 
F.  Scott,  M.A.— (T.  &  T.  Clark.)     Edinburgh.— Editor. 


Date  Due 

Je9    '38 

tAClJl 

AG  24 '^a 

>^i«C^ 



^ 

fif^;;;;j;|js;;;-;;;'[^;l^;:li!ji:!;l:h 


BS2615.4.B28 

The  Gospel  of  St.  John  and  the  synoptic 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00029  9869 


